Independent Medical Examination

A medical examination of the plaintiff conducted by a defense-selected physician to evaluate the claimed injuries — a standard defense discovery tool in personal injury litigation.

Independent Medical Examination in Personal Injury Cases

The IME is one of the defense's most powerful discovery tools — it produces a medical opinion by a physician of the defense's choosing that can directly contradict the plaintiff's treating doctors at trial.

California Code of Civil Procedure section 2032.020(a) gives the defense one IME as of right when the plaintiff's physical or mental condition is in controversy. Additional examinations require a court order showing good cause.

Selecting the examiner. The defense selects the examining physician — typically a specialist in the relevant field (orthopedic surgeon for a musculoskeletal injury, neurologist for a brain injury, psychiatrist for an emotional distress claim). Defense IME doctors are often paid significantly more than they would earn in clinical practice, creating an incentive to produce opinions favorable to defendants. This is a legitimate point of cross-examination at trial.

Scope of the examination. The IME must be limited to conditions directly placed in controversy. If the plaintiff claims only an orthopedic injury, the IME doctor cannot examine the plaintiff for an unrelated heart condition.

Recording the examination. California allows the plaintiff's attorney to have the examination recorded — either by audio or by a certified court reporter attending the exam. This is a critical protection against inaccurate reporting of what occurred during the examination. CCP § 2032.530 governs recording rights.

The IME report. The plaintiff is entitled to request a copy of the IME physician's written report under CCP § 2032.610. Once that report is requested, the plaintiff must similarly produce reports from their own medical experts.

Common IME conclusions. IME physicians frequently opine that: the injury pre-existed the accident; the injury was less severe than the plaintiff claims; maximum medical improvement has been reached (no further treatment is necessary); or the claimed symptoms are inconsistent with objective findings.

How Independent Medical Examination Works in Practice

A typical IME scenario: The plaintiff suffered a herniated disc in a car accident. She has been treating with her orthopedic surgeon, who opines she will need surgery and has permanent limitations. The defense retains an orthopedic surgeon to conduct an IME.

The IME physician reviews the plaintiff's pre-accident medical records (looking for evidence of pre-existing disc disease), reviews post-accident imaging, and conducts a physical examination. His report concludes that the disc herniation predated the accident based on MRI findings, that the plaintiff is at maximum medical improvement without need for surgery, and that she has no permanent disability attributable to the accident.

At trial, the jury hears from both the plaintiff's treating orthopedist (surgery needed, permanent restrictions) and the defense IME physician (no causation, no surgery indicated, no permanent impairment). The jury weighs the competing opinions. The plaintiff's attorney cross-examines the IME physician on: how much defense work he does annually, how often he concludes defendants are liable, and whether he reviewed all the relevant records.

The plaintiff has the right to be accompanied by a representative during the IME (though not an attorney) and to record the examination — rights that should be exercised to ensure accuracy.

State-by-State Variations

Every state in civil litigation allows the defense to request an independent medical examination, though the rules differ in significant ways:

Federal courts authorize IMEs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 35, which requires a court order showing the mental or physical condition is in controversy and there is good cause for the examination. California allows one IME as of right without a court order (CCP § 2032.020(a)).

Recording rights during IMEs vary. California expressly allows audio recording under CCP § 2032.530. Some states prohibit recording or do not address it, leaving the issue to discretion.

Workers' compensation systems have their own IME equivalents — typically called "qualified medical evaluator" (QME) or "agreed medical evaluator" (AME) examinations — which operate under separate statutory frameworks distinct from civil litigation.

Some states allow the plaintiff to select the examining physician from a neutral panel rather than giving the defense unilateral selection rights. This approach is less common in civil personal injury cases but appears in workers' compensation and no-fault insurance systems.

Related Legal Terms