Opinion
2022 CW 1074
10-31-2022
RONALD HICKS v. USAA GENERAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, ROBERT L. HARGER, JR., R. L. HARGER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. AND HARGER AND COMPANY, INC.
In Re: USAA General Indemnity Company and Robert L. Harger, applying for supervisory writs, 18th Judicial District Court, Parish of Pointe Coupee, No. 47326.
BEFORE: WHIPPLE, C.J., GUIDRY, THERIOT, PENZATO AND WOLFE, JJ.
WRIT GRANTED WITH ORDER. The district court's September 7, 2022 judgment which denied the motion to compel additional medical examination filed by defendants and ordered that defendants must use Dr. Chambliss Harrod for the additional medical examination of plaintiff is reversed. In Hicks v. USAA General Indemnity Co., 2021-00840 (La. 3/25/22), 339 So.3d 1106, the Supreme Court reversed the rulings of the lower courts which denied defendants' motion seeking an additional medical examination, but did not place restrictions or limitations on the additional medical examination. La. Code Civ. P. art. 1978 allows parties to call new witnesses when a new trial is ordered. Accordingly, defendants' motion to compel additional medical examination by Dr. Everett Robert is granted, and this matter is remanded to the district court with instructions to comply with La. Code Civ. P. art. 1464(A) by specifying the time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination.
VGW
JMG
MRT
AHP
Wolfe, J., dissents. The criteria set forth in Berlitz Construction Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., 396 So.2d 878 (La. 1981) (per curiam), are not met.