Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
In Re John A. Mitchell
563 F.2d 143
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1977-10-12
- Topic
- general
BY THE COURT: IT IS ORDERED that the petition for writ of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari or other appropriate writ and for other relief is GRANTED. The scope of Rule 35, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is not coextensive with that of Rule 26, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 35 requires that examinations be conducted by physicians. Therefore, although the instant petition evinces a discovery order compatible with Rule 26 the order is erroneous in light of Rule 35. See Lavergne v.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed In Re John A. Mitchell. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 9 opinions
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for writ of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari or other appropriate writ and for other relief is GRANTED. The scope of Rule 35, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is not coextensive with that of Rule 26, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 35 requires that examinations be conducted by physicians. Therefore, although the instant petition evinces a discovery order compatible with Rule 26 the order is erroneous in light of Rule 35. See Lavergne v. Davis, 5th Cir., No. 77-2465 [unpublished order] (mandamus granted in similar context).