Dionne Burns, individually and on behalf of her minor children, Garrett Burns and Gage Burns VS Houston Specialty Insurance Company, Welding Testing X-Ray, Incorporated and Matthew T. Aymond
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT DIONNE BURNS, INDIVIDUALLY BEHALF OF MINOR GARRETT HER BURNS AND AND ON 2019 NO. CW 1589 CHILDREN, GAGE BURNS VERSUS HOUSTON SPECIALTY COMPANY, WELDING TESTING MATTHEW T. AND INC. In Re: INSURANCE X- RAY, Houston 2019 16, October Specialty Insurance Matthew Aymond, T. find We reversed. Company, that the controversy and plaintiff Andrews, clinical a connection with and shown not the This instructions licensed is La. place, manner, Compel Houston an to is her find additional psychologist, Dr. the trial Civ. Code P. conditions, and that by Dr. with 1464 scope but Greve, court art. in medical testing by additional testing to in Dr. use treated further is and plaintiff has s Incorporated intent of clinical remanded with to additional include not of We for court' discretion who herein. cause for shall comply time, the specify issue cause matter to notice trial X - Ray, of JJ. CHUTZ, Motion condition given good Greve, good examination Greve. has for Court, defendants, by Testing abuse mental at shown Dr. by examination have an AND The the neuropsychologist, injuries have defendants denied Welding was ORDER. filed Evaluation X - Ray, applying District HOLDRIDGE, WITH which ruling Medical Independent 2020 48435. WELCH, GRANTED WRIT DENIED; 16, Welding Aymond, Judicial No. Coupee, McCLENDON, Company, T. 18th writs, Pointe McDONALD, STAY and of Matthew and supervisory BEFORE: Insurance Specialty Incorporated Parish JANUARY AYMOND of to that examination. JMM PMc Holdridge J., Welch Chutz, Code La. made. for and medical to failed use order report, did to prove not produce to physician, a to plaintiff court, to by an an provided the party evidence was a that clinical Dr. expert. Andrews' neuropsychologist, Andrews is a licensed clinical psychologist as required by the foregoing article. CO RT OF APPEAL, DEPUTY FOR CLERK THE FIRST OF CIRCUIT COURT COURT has intent of an only produced a portion of Dr. she clinical Defendants notice as motion additional expert. psychologist showing upon licensed a provided such use the submit examination clinical indicated allows party an that defendants which 1464 a intention of licensed a Specifically, and dissent and would deny on the art. regarding who is not notice herein to P. opinion psychologist given JJ., Civ. cause, good concurs.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
