(a) If a defendant who has demanded a physical examination under this article, on receipt of the plaintiff's response to that demand, deems that any modification of the demand, or any refusal to submit to the physical examination is unwarranted, that defendant may move for an order compelling compliance with the demand. This motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040.
§ 2032.250.Motion to compel compliance; requirements; monetary sanctions
Title 4. Civil Discovery Act · Chapter 15. Physical or Mental Examination · Article 2. Physical Examination of Personal Injury Plaintiff · Enacted 2004 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceSection 2032.250 lets a defendant move to compel compliance with an exam demand when the plaintiff's proposed modifications or refusal are unwarranted, requires a meet-and-confer declaration with the motion, and mandates monetary sanctions against whoever loses.
Full Text of § 2032.250
(b) The court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel compliance with a demand for a physical examination, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.
Plain-English Summary
Sometimes a plaintiff does respond on time, but the defendant disagrees with what the response says. If a defendant, after receiving the plaintiff's response, believes any modification the plaintiff proposed, or any refusal to submit to the exam, is unwarranted, the defendant may move for an order compelling compliance with the original demand. That motion must be accompanied by a meet-and-confer declaration, confirming the parties tried to work out the disagreement themselves before asking the court to step in.
As with the failure-to-respond scenario in the prior section, this motion carries mandatory teeth. The court must impose a monetary sanction against whichever side loses, whether that's the defendant who unsuccessfully sought to compel compliance or the plaintiff who unsuccessfully resisted it, unless the losing party acted with substantial justification or a sanction would otherwise be unjust.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a defendant challenge a plaintiff's proposed modifications to an exam demand?
Yes. If the defendant deems the modifications or refusal unwarranted, the defendant may move for an order compelling compliance with the demand as originally made.
What must accompany a motion to compel compliance under this section?
A meet-and-confer declaration showing the parties tried to resolve the dispute before involving the court.
Is a sanction guaranteed on this kind of motion?
The court must impose a monetary sanction against whoever unsuccessfully makes or opposes the motion, unless that party acted with substantial justification or a sanction would be unjust.
Amendment History
(Added by Stats.2004, c. 182 (A.B.3081), § 23, operative July 1, 2005.)
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from
the West's Annotated California Codes / Thomson Reuters. Enacted by the California Legislature.
Last verified July 29, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: motion to compel compliance exam demandunwarranted modification physical examination