Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
10. Should the court grant the truck driver's motion?
The truck driver filed a motion challenging the alleged injuries and requested that the court order the garbage worker to submit to an examination by a licensed physician.
A garbage worker, a citizen of State A, sued a truck driver, a citizen of State B, in federal court in State B. The garbage worker is seeking $125,000 as compensation for injuries he suffered in a car accident that occurred in State A. State B law does not permit a court to order plaintiffs to submit to an examination by physicians, but State A law does. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorize courts to order a physical examination by a licensed examiner.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
In Sibbach v. Wilson Co., Inc., 312 U.S. 1 (1941), the Supreme Court held that FRCP 35, which outlines the process for ordering a party to submit to a physical or mental evaluation, is a federal procedural law. FRCP 35 is applicable only in certain narrow circumstances, generally when a party's mental or physical condition is directly at issue in the action. Its use must be supported by good cause, and it cannot be applied to a non-party.
Exam tip: When a potential Erie analysis arises on the MBE, pay close attention to the facts. If the court is not sitting in diversity and is exercising federal question jurisdiction, federal law will apply and there is no need to examine applicable state law.
C is correct. The issue here is whether the truck driver's request that the court order an examination of the garbage worker is procedural or substantive. Federal courts sitting in diversity apply federal procedural law when it is on point. Under Sibbach, whether a federal court may authorize a physical examination is a procedural question. Here, there is a specific federal rule that authorizes the court to order such an examination, and therefore, it applies.
A is incorrect. On the contrary, the truck driver's motion presents a procedural question. If there is a federal procedural rule on point, as is the case here, it is applicable in diversity actions.
B is incorrect. As explained above, this question presents a federal procedural issue, and there is a federal procedural rule that directly applies. As a result, the federal rule governs this question, not state law.
D is incorrect. This answer choice states the correct conclusion with the incorrect legal reasoning. The court should grant the motion, but not because State A law applies. This is not a substantive issue, but a procedural one, as explained above.