Also known as:mental examination · mental exam · mental exams · psychiatric examination · psychological evaluation
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A discovery device authorizing a court to order a party to submit to examination of mental condition by a suitably licensed or certified examiner. The order issues only when the party's mental condition is placed in controversy by the claims or defenses and the movant demonstrates good cause on notice to all parties.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
3
Plaintiff's Cognitive Claims Trigger Exam
Melanie Morris sued Mirage Hotels after a fall in the lobby left her with persistent headaches, memory loss, and depression. She sought damages for emotional distress and cognitive impairment. Mirage moved for an order requiring Morris to undergo a neuropsychological examination by a licensed specialist. The court granted the motion because Morris's allegations placed her mental condition directly in controversy and the defense showed good cause for an independent evaluation beyond the records already produced.
Mental Exam Evidence in Sentencing Challenge
Michael Miller sued Apex Manufacturing after a workplace accident caused lasting cognitive deficits and emotional trauma. He claimed damages for mental impairment. Apex moved under Rule 35 for an independent psychiatric examination. The court granted the order, finding Miller's mental condition in controversy and good cause shown despite prior treatment records.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Federal Rules
Model Codes
Casebooks
Strickland v. Washington466 U.S. 668 (1984)
Constitutional Challenge to Compelled Exam
Meredith Maxwell refused to submit to a court-ordered mental examination in a personal-injury action, arguing that the order violated her substantive rights. The court upheld the order, holding that the examination was a procedural mechanism that did not enlarge or abridge any substantive right and therefore fell within the rulemaking power.
Sibbach v. Wilson & Co.312 U.S. 1, 14 (1941)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
4
When is a party's mental condition considered 'in controversy' for purposes of ordering an examination?+
A mental condition is in controversy when the pleadings affirmatively place it at issue, such as by alleging cognitive deficits, emotional distress, or psychiatric injury that forms a basis for damages or liability. Incidental references to emotional harm are ordinarily insufficient.
Supporting sources
What showing must a movant make to obtain a court-ordered mental examination?+
The movant must proceed by motion, give notice to all parties and the person to be examined, and demonstrate good cause. Good cause exists when the condition is genuinely disputed and existing records or other discovery are inadequate to resolve the dispute.
Supporting sources
May a court order a mental examination when the plaintiff has already produced medical records and undergone prior evaluations?+
Yes. Prior examinations and records do not automatically defeat the motion. The defendant is entitled to an independent evaluation by a suitably licensed examiner of its own choosing when the condition remains in controversy and good cause is shown.
Supporting sources
What must the court's order specify when granting a mental examination?+
The order must specify the time, place, manner, conditions, and scope of the examination as well as the person or persons who will perform it. These details allow the court to tailor the examination and protect against undue burden.
Supporting sources
466 U.S. 668 (1984)Criminal Procedure
…hearing, defense counsel spoke with respondent about his background, but did not seek out character witnesses or request a psychiatric examination. Counsel's decision not to present evidence concerning respondent's character and emotional state reflected his judgment that it was advisable to rely on the plea colloquy for evidence as…