Counsel for the plaintiff’s first argument is that the defendant has already obtained an independent medical assessment of the plaintiff by a neurologist: the defendant’s request for a psychiatric assessment is simply an attempt to obtain a second opinion concerning the same matter. In support of this position, the plaintiff cites the decision of Jopling v. Krystik, [1990] B.C.J. No. 2981 (S.C.).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.