Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Davis v. Johnson International Industries, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle

July 30, 2017

MICHAEL DAVIS, Plaintiff,
v.
JOHNSON INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES, INC., d/b/a CONTINENTAL HARDWOOD CO., a Washington Corporation, and LISA JOHNSON, an individual and the marital community comprised of LISA JOHNSON and DON FULLER, Defendants.

          Marina M. Visan, CARSON & NOEL PLLC, Attorneys for Plaintiff.

          Marina M. Visan, Todd W. Wyatt, Marina M. Visan, CARSON & NOEL PLLC, Attorneys for Plaintiff.

          STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR RULE 35 EXAM.

          Thomas S. Zilly United States District Judge.

         A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

         Plaintiff seeks recovery for alleged emotional distress, which is alleged to be the result of the acts and omissions of the Defendants. The Defendants have requested an examination pursuant to FRCP 35. A Rule 35 rule requirement is that there be a mental or physical condition “in controversy.” The parties desire to stipulate to the following without the need for Defendants to file a motion to make a showing of good cause

         B. STIPULATION

         It is understood and therefore stipulated that: 1. The Rule 35 examination shall take place at the offices of Dr. Mark McClung located at 1200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2010, Seattle, WA 98101.

         2. The Rule 35 Examination shall occur beginning at 8:30 am on August 1, 2017.

         3. The Rule 35 examination shall be conducted by Dr. Mark McClung (“Examiner”). It may consist of a psychiatric interview and administration of a written test and short questionnaires. The Examination with testing shall last no longer than six (6) hours, aside from a lunch break and any other breaks or other delays caused by the Plaintiff or his representative.

         4. Plaintiff shall have the right to have a single representative present at the examination who may take notes and videotape and/or audiotape the proceedings, at no extra charges by the Examiner, so long as Plaintiff provides the name of the representative in advance of the examination. If Plaintiff s representative records the examination (video or audio), Plaintiff will provide a copy of the recording to Defendants within five (5) business days after the examination. Plaintiffs representative will not interfere with or obstruct the examination unless the scope of the examination invades attorney-client or other privileges belonging to Mr. Davis, or violates the terms of this agreement. Defendants have no right to have a representative present at the examination.

         5. Examiner shall make a written report of the exam; the attorneys for Defendants shall cause a copy of the report to be delivered to Plaintiffs counsel within five (5) business days of its receipt by Defendants' counsel, and no later than thirty (30) calendar days after the date of the exam. The written report of the examination shall be detailed and set forth separately:

a. The findings made by the Examiner;
b. The results of all tests made by or done at the request of ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.