In Roe v. Superior Court (Hollister School Dist.), published December 18, 2015, the Sixth District Court of Appeal issued a writ reversing a trial court's order permitting a psychiatrist to interview the parents of a minor plaintiff who alleged that another minor student had molested him at school. The minor sued the school district, through his father as guardian ad litem. The minor's mother was also a plaintiff. The school district had moved the court for an order permitting the mental examination of the plaintiff under Code of Civil Procedure section 2032.020, to include interviews of the parents by the examining psychiatrist.
The court held that under Section 2032.020's language, a court has no power to permit the mental examination of a minor party's parents as part of the minor's mental examination. The statute permits a court to order the mental examination of a party to the action, an agent of the party, or a natural person in the custody or under the care of a party. Although the mother was a party, she was not a party for purposes of this order, which sought a psychiatric examination of only the minor plaintiff. The guardian ad litem is not a party. Neither parent is the minor plaintiff's agent, or is in the minor's custody or control. Therefore, the trial court could not order their interviews.
The appellate court declined to decide two other issues--whether the parents had a right to be present for the examination, and whether the plaintiffs had a right to production of copywritten testing materials--on procedural grounds.
Comments