Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 20 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from In Re Conservatorship of Stevenson.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In Re Conservatorship of Stevenson Anchor | green | “discovery of a person's mental or physical condition may be just as appropriate in a case where the party sought to be examined has done nothing to put his condition in issue as in a case where the party sought to be examined has affirmatively raised his condition either in supp…” | 4 |
| 2 | In Re Conservatorship of Stevenson | green | “limiting the scope of rule 215 as defendant suggests would not be consistent with either the letter or intent of the rule.” | 4 |
| 3 | In Re Conservatorship of Stevenson | green | “substantially all of plaintiffs' material allegations,” | 4 |
| 4 | Moore v. Centreville Township Hospital | green | “as a result of an examination by a physician, employed by an opponent, solely for the purpose of rendering a medical-legal opinion.” | 4 |
| 5 | Kaull v. Kaull | green | “although a 'good cause' requirement has been eliminated from rule 215, physical and mental examinations, like all of our discovery devices, require that trial courts carefully exercise their discretion.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.