Key Takeaway
New York court rules that subsequent IMEs require demonstrated necessity when initial examination reaches definitive conclusions in no-fault insurance cases.
Understanding the Limits of Multiple Independent Medical Examinations
Independent Medical Examinations (IMEs) are a standard tool in New York no-fault insurance disputes, allowing insurance companies to have their own medical experts evaluate injured parties. However, insurance carriers cannot simply demand unlimited examinations. As demonstrated in a recent appellate decision, there are important legal boundaries governing when multiple IMEs may be required.
The question of whether a second IME can be compelled often arises when insurance companies are dissatisfied with initial examination results or when they claim additional testing is needed. While medical necessity requirements apply to many aspects of no-fault coverage, the standards for ordering subsequent examinations focus on whether the party requesting the additional IME can demonstrate its necessity.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Kolodziejski v Jaskolka, 2017 NY Slip Op 07851
“While there is no restriction in CPLR 3121 limiting the number of examinations to which a party may be subjected, a party seeking a further examination must demonstrate the necessity for it” (Rinaldi v Evenflo Co., Inc., 62 AD3d 856, 856 ). Here, the examining physician was able to reach a definitive conclusion as a result of the initial independent medical examination, and she never indicated that her analysis and/or conclusion were affected by plaintiff’s alleged refusal to perform certain tests. The court therefore properly declined to compel plaintiff to undergo a second independent medical examination “
Key Takeaway
Courts will not automatically grant requests for subsequent IMEs. When an initial examination produces definitive medical conclusions and the examining physician does not indicate that incomplete testing affected their analysis, insurance companies cannot compel additional examinations without demonstrating specific necessity for the follow-up evaluation.
