California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Mero v. Sadoff, 31 Cal.App.4th 1466, 37 Cal.Rptr.2d 769 (Cal. App. 1995):
The court also cited Rogers v. Horvath (1975) 65 Mich.App. 644 [237 N.W.2d 595], another case relied upon by defendant here. Rogers, however, involved a plaintiff whose action was based on malpractice in the examination by the employer's physician based on the report prepared, not on injuries received during the course of the examination. (237
Page 774
The court added, "This is not to say that a physician who examines a person for reasons other than diagnosis or treatment and for the benefit of some one other than the examinee owes no duty of due care to that person. Rather, we hold that the physician in such a case does not owe such a duty of care as will subject him to liability for malpractice." (Rogers v. Horvath, supra, 237 N.W.2d at p. 597.)
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.