Case Name: Floyd J. RIVERE and Janice Mary Rivere v. NPC SERVICES, INC.; NUS Corporation, Exxon Corporation; the Dow Chemical Company; Ethyl Corporation; Allied Chemical Corporation; ICI Americas, Inc. (Formerly Rubicon Chemicals, Inc.; Celanese Corporation (Formerly American Hoechst Corporation; Formerly Foster Grant Company, Inc.)); Uniroyal, Inc.; Copolymer Rubber and Chemical Corporation; and Shell Chemical, Inc.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1994-03-15
Citations: 634 So. 2d 842
Docket Number: No. 94-CC-0619
Parties: Floyd J. RIVERE and Janice Mary Rivere v. NPC SERVICES, INC.; NUS Corporation, Exxon Corporation; the Dow Chemical Company; Ethyl Corporation; Allied Chemical Corporation; ICI Americas, Inc. (Formerly Rubicon Chemicals, Inc.; Celanese Corporation (Formerly American Hoechst Corporation; Formerly Foster Grant Company, Inc.)); Uniroyal, Inc.; Copolymer Rubber and Chemical Corporation; and Shell Chemical, Inc.
Judges: DENNIS, J., not on panel.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 634
Pages: 842–842

Head Matter:
Floyd J. RIVERE and Janice Mary Rivere v. NPC SERVICES, INC.; NUS Corporation, Exxon Corporation; the Dow Chemical Company; Ethyl Corporation; Allied Chemical Corporation; ICI Americas, Inc. (Formerly Rubicon Chemicals, Inc.; Celanese Corporation (Formerly American Hoechst Corporation; Formerly Foster Grant Company, Inc.)); Uniroyal, Inc.; Copolymer Rubber and Chemical Corporation; and Shell Chemical, Inc.
No. 94-CC-0619.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
March 15, 1994.
Rehearing Denied April 29, 1994.

Opinion:
In re Rivere, Floyd, et al.; Rivere, Janice Mary; — Plaintiffs); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs; Parish of East Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court, Div. "I", No. 336,561; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. CW94 0338.
Granted. The order of the district court that plaintiff submit to a neuropsychological examination by a neuropsychologist who is not a physician is reversed and set aside. LSA-C.C.P. art. 1464; Williams v. Smith, 576 So.2d 448 (La.1991).