Opinion
Case No. 8:05-CV-453-T-17MAP.
February 13, 2006
AMENDED ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant's Motion for Order for Physical Examination Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 35 (doc. 27). Plaintiff has failed to respond to Defendant's motion. Therefore, the Court presumes Plaintiff has no objection to Defendant's requested relief. See Local Rule 3.01(b).
Under Rule 35, Defendant must establish that the Plaintiff's physical condition is "in controversy" and that it has "good cause" for the requested examination. Schlagenhauf v. Holder, 379 U.S. 104 (1964). In his complaint Plaintiff alleges total and permanent disability due to medical problems relating to his spine, heart and cardiovascular system, liver, hernia, and gastrointestinal disorders. He also alleges disability from back related disorders and claims of disabling pain. As such, this Court finds that Plaintiff has put his physical condition in controversy. The motion for orthopaedic and physiatric examinations is granted.
ORDERED:
1. Defendant's Motion for Order for Physical Examination Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 35 (doc. 27) is GRANTED.
2. The Plaintiff is to submit to an orthopaedic examination to be conducted by Michael D. Slomka, M.D., at a date and time mutually convenient to both parties.
3. The Plaintiff is to submit to an physiatric examination to be conducted by Rodolfo D. Eichberg, M.D., at a date and time mutually convenient to both parties.
DONE and ORDERED.