The auto insurance medical exam reports are fraught with problems of admissibility because almost all of them paraphrase treatment records or other records The defense medical exam reports and other expert reports because they are inadmissible as hearsay and/or double hearsay for the following reasons.
A skilled car accident trial lawyer can make the request on your behalf to exclude the independent medical exams would be made pursuant to MRE 103(c) which states:
(c) Hearing of Jury. In jury cases, proceedings shall be conducted, to the extent practicable, so as to prevent inadmissible evidence from being suggested to the jury by any means, such as making statements or offers of proof or asking questions in the hearing of the jury.
The jury should not hear hearsay because it is not reliable evidence. The auto insurance medical exam reports commonly referred to as defense medical exam reports are subject to hearsay and double hearsay.
Car insurance medical exam (IME) doctors are not seeing you for purposes of “care or treatment”, which would qualify as an exception to the hearsay rule. This is a key aspect why the so called independent medical exam report is not admissible. In fact, if you read the first paragraph in the defense medical exam reports they clearly state a physician-patient relationship was not established with you. Thus, car insurance compnay cannot prove any exception to hearsay applies to the IME reports.
Insurance defense independent medical exam reports are also inadmissible because they contain several layers of hearsay and double hearsay.
Your lawyer should argue that the defense medical exam reports should also be excluded from evidence under MRE 403 because the reports would be unduly prejudicial, waste of time, confusing and presenting cumulative evidence since defense experts are expected to give oral opinion testimony.
The Michigan Court of Appeals considered the same issue in People v. Huyser, 221 Mich App 293, 561 N.W.2d 481 (1997), and concluded that the trial court erred by allowing the State to utilize, in its prosecution, an expert witness report of the doctor it hired to examine the victim of a sex crime. Because the report was prepared for the purpose of litigation, the Court believed it lacked trustworthiness of a record generated exclusively for business purposes. Id. The Supreme Court of Main in State v. Tomails, 736 A.2d 1047 (ME 1999), reached the same conclusion, holding forensic expert reports are the antitheses of the business records addressed by the Maine version of Rule 803(6) and the fact that they are prepared in anticipation of litigation is a common reason for finding that they lack trustworthiness. Similarly, in McElroy v. Perry, 753 So.2d 121 (FLA 2000), the Florida Court of Appeal’s reached the same conclusion. Thus, Defendant insurance companies’ independent medical exams report(s) (IME) and other expert reports are not admissible under the business record exception either.
Experienced Michigan Auto Law Car Accident Injury Trial Lawyers in Michigan
If you have been injured in any type of injury accident, the insurance doctor's independent medical exam by a so called independent medical examiner can be excluded from evidence in your case. Call our personal injury law firm to discuss how you can fight the IME exam and what you can do to prevent the use of the independent medical exam report in your lawsuit. Call now at 248-352-2110 or toll free at 1-866-447-3563 or contact us through our contact form.
