The defendant brought a motion seeking two orders: a defence medical examination with an orthopaedic surgeon and an in-home cost of care assessment with an occupational therapist.
The court dismissed the request for the orthopaedic examination, finding it would merely corroborate an existing physiatrist's report and was not necessary for trial fairness.
However, the court granted the request for the in-home cost of care assessment, noting significant changes in the plaintiff's condition and living circumstances since the last report, and that the assessment was necessary for the defendant to fairly meet the plaintiff's substantial future cost of care claim, particularly regarding psychological and psychiatric impacts not fully covered by previous physical assessments.
