The defendant brought a motion to compel the 83-year-old plaintiff to attend an examination for discovery with the defendant present.
The plaintiff, who alleged the defendant (her son) misappropriated her funds and breached his fiduciary duty, argued she would be intimidated by his presence.
The court found that the plaintiff established cause for the defendant's exclusion, noting the likelihood of intimidation and disruption, and the lack of prejudice to the defendant.
The motion was dismissed, and the discovery was ordered to proceed without the defendant present.
