From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wondie v. King Cnty.

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Oct 13, 2023
2:21-cv-01623-JHC (W.D. Wash. Oct. 13, 2023)

Opinion

2:21-cv-01623-JHC

10-13-2023

GIZACHEW WONDIE, Plaintiff, v. KING COUNTY, et al., Defendant.

LAW OFFICES OF DAN N. FIORITO, III Attorney for Gizachew Wondie KING COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, John Zeldenrust, Karissa Taylor, Attorneys for Defendant King County CORR CRONIN LLP, Steve Fogg, Taryn Basauri, Attorneys for Defendant Kathleen Decker


LAW OFFICES OF DAN N. FIORITO, III Attorney for Gizachew Wondie

KING COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, John Zeldenrust, Karissa Taylor, Attorneys for Defendant King County

CORR CRONIN LLP, Steve Fogg, Taryn Basauri, Attorneys for Defendant Kathleen Decker

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR F.R.C.P. 35 EXAM OF PLAINTIFF

THE HONORABLE JOHN H. CHUN, United States District Judge

I. STIPULATION

In accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Professional Rules of Conduct, Plaintiff Gizachew Wondie, Defendant King County, and Defendant Kathleen Decker stipulate to the following:

1. The parties agree there is good cause to perform a defense psychological examination (“exam”) of Plaintiff, which shall be conducted at the time and location agreed to by counsel for the Parties. The Parties agree to work cooperatively to schedule these exams. The exam may take place via remote means. The Parties have further agreed that the exam may take place following the discovery cutoff due to scheduling difficulties.

2. Defendants' expert psychologist will first conduct a clinical assessment of Plaintiff, which includes an interview to obtain a detailed description of current psychiatric functioning and symptoms; detailed information about medical, individual psychiatric, family psychiatric, social and developmental histories; a substance use history; a history of treatment efforts and compliance regarding psychiatric conditions; and a mental status examination.

3. Defendants' expert psychologist will then administer psychological testing and likely use the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (the newer MMPI-3). The MMPI-3 consists of 338 True-False questions.

4. Plaintiff may be accompanied by a non-expert chaperone during the following portions of the interview portion of exam. Consistent with accepted industry standards, the chaperone may not be present during the psychological testing. The Parties agree that in no event may counsel of record for either party, or any attorney from counsel's firm(s), attend an exam as a chaperone and/or videographer. Plaintiff will disclose to Defendants the name of the chaperone, if any, twenty-four (24) hours before the examination takes place. This individual may observe the interview portion of the exam but may not interfere with or obstruct it.

5. In the event that a problem arises during the course of the exam, the Defendants' expert psychologist will contact the attorneys for the Defendants who will immediately contact attorneys for Plaintiff in an effort to promptly resolve any problem. The Parties will provide their contact information for the day of the exam twenty-four (24) hours before the examination.

6. Psychologists and neuropsychologists have an ethical and professional responsibly to maintain test security and to protect test materials. The Parties agree that they will not seek disclosure of any test data as defined by APA Ethics Code Standard 9.04 (“Release of Test Data”) resulting from any exam in violation of these ethical and professional responsibilities. The Parties agree that the test data will be exchanged between the Parties' respective experts, the Defendants' expert psychologist and Dr. Robert Stanulis, as provided below, but that it will not be provided directly to the Parties or counsel. The Parties agree that information exchanged between the experts will be limited to test data, including the raw data, and communications related to testing materials and test data. The information exchanged between the experts will not be provided directly to the Parties or counsel absent written authorization of the Parties and experts or an order of this Court.

II. ORDER

Based upon the above Stipulation of the Parties, it is hereby ORDERED that the Parties and their counsel of record will abide by its terms.


Summaries of

Wondie v. King Cnty.

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Oct 13, 2023
2:21-cv-01623-JHC (W.D. Wash. Oct. 13, 2023)
Case details for

Wondie v. King Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:GIZACHEW WONDIE, Plaintiff, v. KING COUNTY, et al., Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Oct 13, 2023

Citations

2:21-cv-01623-JHC (W.D. Wash. Oct. 13, 2023)