The defendants brought a motion seeking production of original diagnostic imaging records, reattendance of the plaintiffs for discovery, and a further defence medical examination of the plaintiff by an orthopaedic surgeon.
The plaintiffs opposed, arguing the requests were disproportionate and that the defendants were only entitled to one physical examination.
The court granted the motion, finding the diagnostic imaging relevant and its production justified.
The court also ordered reattendance for discovery to answer follow-up questions.
Finally, the court ordered the further defence medical examination, limited to assessing the cause and prognosis of the plaintiff's labral tear, as the first examining physiatrist lacked the necessary expertise.
