Laney et al v. Schneider National Carriers, Inc. et al
OPINION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Frank H McCarthy (Re: 89 Joint MOTION to Compel Plaintiff to Appear for Mental Examination ) (jcm, Dpty Clk)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA DAVID LANEY and SANDY LANEY, Attorneys in Fact for Shannon Laney, ) ) ) PLAINTIFFS, ) ) vs. ) ) SCHNEIDER NATIONAL CARRIERS, ) INC., GHEORGAE POPOVICI, and ) OLEKSANDR SHADYUK, LIBERTY ) MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, ) INS INSURANCE, INC., and THE CITY ) OF TULSA, OKLAHOMA, ) ) DEFENDANTS. )
CASE NO. 09-CV-389-TCK-FHM
OPINION AND ORDER This Order clarifies the Court's oral ruling during the telephone hearing held on May 27, 2010, Defendants' Joint Emergency Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Appear for Mental Examination [Dkt. 89]. The Court's oral ruling denying the motion was based on Defendants' unilateral selection of dates for the examination and Defendants' failure to bring the issue before the Court promptly when Plaintiff advised that she was not available for examination on the dates selected by Defendants. The Court's oral ruling should not be construed as a determination that Defendants are foreclosed from seeking a mental examination under Fed.R.Civ.P. 35 on some other date or dates or location amenable to the parties. Defendants' Joint Emergency Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Appear for Mental Examination [Dkt. 89] is denied without prejudice to filing a motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 35, which seeks an order for Plaintiff to appear for a mental examination on another date or dates.
SO ORDERED this day of 26th day of May, 2010.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?