§35.3 Historical Development

• Jurisdiction: Washington

§35.3HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT

Prior to the adoption of a rule authorizing courts to order medical examinations, there was no right to involuntary medical examination of a party in personal injury litigation. The Supreme Court of the United States denied such examination based on the injured person's right to personal sanctity, stating:

No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law. ...

The inviolability of the person is as much invaded by compulsory stripping and exposure, as by a blow. To compel anyone, and especially a woman, to lay bare the body, or to submit it to the touch of a stranger, without lawful authority, is an indignity, an assault and a trespass; and no order of process, commanding such an exposure or submission, was ever known to the common law in the administration of justice between individuals, except in a very small number of cases, based upon special reasons, and upon ancient practice, coming down from ruder ages, now mostly obsolete in England, and never, so far as we are aware, introduced into this country.

Union Pac. Ry. Co. v....