Order Reversing in Part Order Directing Medical Examination

Summary: The insurer appeals that portion of the DLI’s Order Directing Medical Examination which allows the claimant to videotape an IME. The insurer argues that this Court should reverse the DLI because it does not have authority to impose protective measures on an IME or because there was insufficient evidence for the DLI to order that the claimant be allowed to videotape the IME. The insurer also argues this Court should allow it to suspend the claimant’s benefits until she attends the IME.

Held: To the extent that the DLI’s Order Directing Medical Examination allows Matejovsky to videotape the IME, the order is reversed. Under § 39-71-605(2), MCA, the DLI may set conditions on IMEs and order protective measures when necessary. However, the claimant did not present sufficient evidence to allow her to videotape the examination. The insurer may not suspend the claimant’s benefits because she did not unreasonably fail to attend the IME.

Judgement: To the extent that the DLI’s Order Directing Medical Examination allows Matejovsky to videotape the IME, the order is reversed. Since this Court stayed the IME with Dr. Stratford, New Hampshire may reschedule it under § 39-71-605, MCA; however, Matejovsky will not be allowed to videotape the IME. New Hampshire’s request for an order allowing it to suspend Matejovsky’s benefits until she attends the IME with Dr. Stratford is denied.