Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04018/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04018-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Yolanda Cendejas
Plaintiff
Federal Insurance Company, Inc.
Defendant
The Chubb Group of Insurance Companies
Defendant

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Yolanda Cendejas,

 Plaintiff(s),

 v.

Federal Insurance Company, Inc., a

New Jersey Corporation doing

business as The Chubb Group of

Insurance Companies,

 Defendant(s).

____________________________/

No. C 04-4018 TEH (WDB)

ORDER FOLLOWING HEARING ON

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO

COMPEL PSYCHIATRIC

EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF

YOLANDA CENDEJAS

On October 12, 2005, the Court conducted a hearing on defendant's motion to

compel a psychiatric examination of plaintiff Yolanda Cendejas. For reasons articulated

more thoroughly on the record, the Court ORDERS as follows:

1. On October 11, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion to strike the allegedly untimely

declaration of Dr. Ronald H. Roberts, and raising evidentiary objections to Dr. Roberts'

declaration as well as the declaration of Dr. Mark Levy. The Court DENIES plaintiff's

motion to strike Dr. Roberts' declaration. The Court will, however, take plaintiff's

evidentiary objections to the declarations of Dr. Roberts and Dr. Levy into consideration

when ruling on defendant's motion to compel plaintiff's psychiatric examination.

2. On the record, plaintiff's counsel represented that, at trial, plaintiff will assert

that defendant's conduct caused or contributed in part to two mental health disorders:

obsessive-compulsive disorder and severe depression. Plaintiff also will contend that

defendant's conduct caused her to experience 'garden-variety' emotional distress,

including anxiousness (but not an anxiety disorder). She will not claim that defendant's

Case 3:04-cv-04018-TEH Document 51 Filed 10/13/05 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

conduct caused or contributed to any additional mental or emotional disorders.

Plaintiff's counsel also represented that plaintiff is no longer suffering from obsessivecompulsive disorder or severe depression.

Based on plaintiff's counsel's representation, the Court RECOMMENDS that

plaintiff not be permitted to introduce evidence at trial that defendant's conduct caused

or contributed to any mental or emotional disorder other than (i) obsessive-compulsive

disorder, and (ii) severe depression. The Court further RECOMMENDS that plaintiff

not be permitted to introduce evidence at trial of continuing obsessive-compulsive

disorder or severe depression.

3. On this record, the Court is not persuaded that the psychiatric examination or

testing of plaintiff is justified. However, defendant is permitted to supplement the

record as follows:

By October 26, 2005, defendant may submit supplemental declarations from

doctors Roberts and/or Levy that identify specific tests or sets of inquiries that, if

administered to or pursued with plaintiff, a substantial percentage of the pertinent part

of the scientific community would agree are likely to contribute substantially to

developing a reliable understanding of the causes and/or severity or either or both of the

disorders that allegedly afflicted plaintiff in the past (OCD and Severe Depression). For

purposes of addressing these questions in the case at bar, defendant's experts must

assume, in making their representations to the court, that plaintiff no longer suffers from

either disorder and that she no longer exhibits the principal symptoms that supported her

treating physician's earlier conclusion that she suffered from these two disorders.

Plaintiff may file a response to these declarations. This response may be

supported by expert declaration(s) and must be received by November 2, 2005. 

The Court will thereafter take the matter under submission.

4. If, after review of the above-described submissions, the Court permits some

psychiatric examination or testing of plaintiff, the following conditions will apply:

(a) The entire examination and testing process will be tape-recorded.

Case 3:04-cv-04018-TEH Document 51 Filed 10/13/05 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

(b) The raw data and any reports prepared by the examining doctors must be

promptly disclosed to plaintiff. Plaintiff may make all such data and reports available

to her treating physicians or experts.

(c) No examination or testing designed to assess plaintiff's 'credibility' or

whether she is 'prone to exaggeration' will be permitted.

(d) Only testing or examination that is reasonably likely to shed reliable light

on the causes or severity of the two specified disorders plaintiff claims to have had in the

past (but that are no longer symptomatic) will be permitted.

5. In his declaration, Dr. Levy must disclose accurately the percentage of the

forensic work that he has done since September 1, 2000, that has been for the defense

side.

Dated: October 13, 2005 /s/ Wayne D. Brazil 

 WAYNE D. BRAZIL

 United States Magistrate Judge

cc: parties, WDB, TEH, stats

Case 3:04-cv-04018-TEH Document 51 Filed 10/13/05 Page 3 of 3