Curtis v. Express, Inc., No. 93-CV-514.

CourtUnited States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of New York
Writing for the CourtKohn, Bookstein & Karp, P.C., Richard A. Kohn, Albany, NY, for plaintiff
Citation868 F. Supp. 467
Decision Date17 October 1994
Docket NumberNo. 93-CV-514.
PartiesNaima E. CURTIS, Plaintiff, v. EXPRESS, INC., sued as Limited Express, Inc., Defendant.

868 F. Supp. 467

Naima E. CURTIS, Plaintiff,
v.
EXPRESS, INC., sued as Limited Express, Inc., Defendant.

No. 93-CV-514.

United States District Court, N.D. New York.

October 17, 1994.


Kohn, Bookstein & Karp, P.C., Richard A. Kohn, Albany, NY, for plaintiff.

Whiteman, Osterman & Hanna, Boty McDonald, Albany, NY, for defendant.

MEMORANDUM, DECISION & ORDER

McAVOY, Chief Judge.

BACKGROUND

On April 3, 1993, plaintiff filed this action against her former employer, Limited Express, Inc., alleging racial discrimination. Plaintiff's remaining claims are brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York State Human Rights Law alleging racial harassment, retaliatory discharge, and hostile work environment. Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages under the New York Human Rights Law for emotional distress.

On June 16, 1994, Magistrate Judge Hurd signed an order which, inter alia, denied defendant's request for a mental examination of plaintiff in regard to her claim for compensatory damages for emotional distress. The Magistrate's order does not indicate the basis on which he denied the motion. On June 27, 1994, defendant filed a motion for reconsideration of that portion of Magistrate Hurd's June 16, 1994 order which denied its request to conduct a mental examination of the plaintiff.

Defendant claims that plaintiff has placed her mental condition at issue by seeking

868 F. Supp. 468
compensatory damages for emotional distress and has asserted the continuing nature of her emotional distress in her complaint and answers to interrogatories, including answers given after a deposition in which plaintiff stated that she only suffered past emotional distress. Thus, defendant believes that it should be entitled to a mental examination of the plaintiff. Defendant acknowledges, however, the fact that plaintiff does not make a separate claim for emotional distress, but rather seeks damages for emotional distress under New York Human Rights Law

Plaintiff counters this argument by asserting that in deposition testimony, she stated that she is not alleging any ongoing psychological injury or disorder and that her claim under New York Human Rights Law was only for the past emotional distress caused by the allegedly offensive conduct of defendant's employee. Plaintiff states that her emotional distress resulting from alleged racial harassment consisted of difficulty in sleeping, loss of appetite and difficulty concentrating and that these symptoms ended by December 1990. Plaintiff notes that she visited a counsellor regarding these problems once on August 29, 1990, no treatment or follow up was ordered, no specific diagnosis of mental or psychiatric injury was made, and plaintiff did not feel it necessary to return for further counselling. Plaintiff notes that the defendant is already in receipt of the medical records from that visit, and examination of her current mental state would not be probative to the claim. She asserts that she does not allege any psychological disorder and will not offer expert testimony regarding her mental health at trial.

In order to obtain the court's permission to conduct a mental or physical examination of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 practice notes
  • Vahai v. Gertsch, S-19-0008
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • January 15, 2020
    ...the plaintiffs had not alleged a separate tort claim for emotional distress, or ongoing severe mental injury); Curtis v. Express, Inc. , 868 F. Supp. 467, 469 (N.D.N.Y. 1994) (holding that the plaintiff in a race discrimination case did not place her mental condition in controversy where sh......
  • LeGendre v. Monroe County, Docket No. 194647.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • June 29, 1999
    ...the plaintiffs had not alleged a separate tort claim for emotional distress, or ongoing severe mental injury); Curtis v. Express, Inc., 868 F.Supp. 467, 469 (N.D.N.Y., 1994) (holding that the plaintiff in a race discrimination case did not place her mental condition in controversy where she......
  • Odom v. Odom, M1999-02811-COA-R3-CV
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Tennessee
    • December 5, 2001
    ...discretion of the trial judge). (FN11). Ragge v. MCA/Universal Studios, 165 F.R.D. 605, 608 (C.D. Cal. 1995); Curtis v. Express, Inc., 868 F. Supp. 467, 469 (N.D.N.Y. 1994). (FN12). This is especially true in this case because of Ms. Kiesig's adamant denial that her son had either sexually ......
  • Ragan v. Petersen, No. 95-1441
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Iowa
    • June 26, 1997
    ...(1964). In some instances, a pleading may form a sufficient basis to satisfy the requirements of Rule 132. See Curtis v. Express, Inc., 868 F.Supp. 467, 468 (N.D.N.Y.1994). In this case, however, the only basis for seeking an independent medical evaluation in the four months following the c......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
15 cases
  • Vahai v. Gertsch, S-19-0008
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • January 15, 2020
    ...the plaintiffs had not alleged a separate tort claim for emotional distress, or ongoing severe mental injury); Curtis v. Express, Inc. , 868 F. Supp. 467, 469 (N.D.N.Y. 1994) (holding that the plaintiff in a race discrimination case did not place her mental condition in controversy where sh......
  • LeGendre v. Monroe County, Docket No. 194647.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • June 29, 1999
    ...the plaintiffs had not alleged a separate tort claim for emotional distress, or ongoing severe mental injury); Curtis v. Express, Inc., 868 F.Supp. 467, 469 (N.D.N.Y., 1994) (holding that the plaintiff in a race discrimination case did not place her mental condition in controversy where she......
  • Odom v. Odom, M1999-02811-COA-R3-CV
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Tennessee
    • December 5, 2001
    ...discretion of the trial judge). (FN11). Ragge v. MCA/Universal Studios, 165 F.R.D. 605, 608 (C.D. Cal. 1995); Curtis v. Express, Inc., 868 F. Supp. 467, 469 (N.D.N.Y. 1994). (FN12). This is especially true in this case because of Ms. Kiesig's adamant denial that her son had either sexually ......
  • Ragan v. Petersen, No. 95-1441
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Iowa
    • June 26, 1997
    ...(1964). In some instances, a pleading may form a sufficient basis to satisfy the requirements of Rule 132. See Curtis v. Express, Inc., 868 F.Supp. 467, 468 (N.D.N.Y.1994). In this case, however, the only basis for seeking an independent medical evaluation in the four months following the c......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT