Opinion ID: 2537114
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether the circuit court abused its discretion in denying the Motion to Compel Physical and Mental Examination.

Text: ¶ 63. The circuit court's Order Denying Defendants' Motion to Compel Physical and Mental Examination of Plaintiff found an absence of good cause and that defendants offered no evidence that the depositions of [Sam] and his treating physician and the production of [Sam's] medical records are inadequate or insufficient to show [Sam's] physical and mental status. ¶ 64. Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 35(a) provides, in pertinent part, that: [w]hen the mental or physical condition... of a party ... is in controversy, the court in which the action is pending may order the party to submit to a physical or mental examination by a suitably licensed or certified examiner.... The order may be made only on motion for good cause shown .... Miss. R. Civ. P. 35(a) (emphasis added). Given the dearth of Mississippi caselaw on Rule 35, rendering this an issue of first impression for this Court, along with the limited nature of the record with respect to this issue (i.e., only the motion and subsequent order), this Court concludes that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying Reed and Baker Donelson's Motion to Compel Physical and Mental Examination.