Group V: Depositions and Discovery · Not amended since adoption on record · Last verified July 13, 2026
In one sentenceRule 35 lets a court order a party whose mental or physical condition is disputed in good faith to undergo an examination — but only in cases where actual damages exceed $100,000 — and sets rules for exchanging the resulting medical reports.
(a)Order for Examination. In any case in which the amount in controversy exceeds $ 100,000 actual damages, and the mental or physical condition (including the blood group) of a party, or of a person in the custody or under the legal control of a party, is in controversy, the court in which the action is pending may order the party to submit to a physical or mental examination by a physician or to produce for examination the person in his custody or legal control. The order may be made only on motion for good cause shown and upon notice to the person to be examined and to all parties and shall specify the time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination and the person or persons by whom it is to be made, and shall be delivered to the person or persons making the examination.
The physician of the party to be examined may be present at the examination. Unless the parties agree, or the court for good cause shown determines otherwise, the examination shall be in the county where the person to be examined, or his physician, resides. Special consideration shall be given to the convenience of the person to be examined and that of his physician in setting the time and place of the examination, and reasonable consideration shall be given to the convenience of the examining physician. Upon reasonable objection to the physician designated to make the examination, and if the parties shall fail to agree as to who shall make the examination, the court may designate a physician; but the fact that a physician was so designated shall not be admissible upon the trial.
(1)If requested by the party against whom an order is made under Rule 35(a) or the person examined, the party causing the examination to be made shall deliver to him a copy of a detailed written report of the examining physician setting out his findings, including results of all tests made, diagnoses and conclusions, together with like reports of all earlier examinations of the same condition. After delivery the party causing the examination shall be entitled to request and receive from the party against whom the order is made a like report of any examination, previously or thereafter made, of the same condition, unless, in the case of a report of examination of a person not a party, the party shows that he is unable to obtain it. The court on motion may make an order against a party requiring delivery of a report on such terms as are just, and if a physician fails or refuses to make a report the court may exclude his testimony if offered at the trial.
(2)By requesting and obtaining a report of the examination so ordered or by taking the deposition of the examiner, the party examined waives any privilege he may have in that action or any other involving the same controversy, regarding the testimony of every other person who has examined or may thereafter examine him in respect of the same mental or physical condition.
(3)This subdivision applies to examinations made by agreement of the parties, unless the agreement expressly provides otherwise. This subdivision does not preclude discovery of a report of an examining physician or the taking of a deposition of the physician in accordance with the provisions of any other rule.
Notes
Note: The language in the first paragraph reflects the existing Federal Rule on the subject, except the $ 100,000 limitation. The language changes are minor and only to clarify the operation of the rule. The second paragraph is new and is not in the Federal Rule. It establishes limitations on the use of the device, particularly that the party examined may have his physician present during the examination and that the examination may take place only in the county of residence of the patient or his physician. The new material also permits objection to be made to the examining physician.
Notes to 1986 Amendment: The Rule as originally written imposed some absolute restrictions on the location and timing of a medical examination. The amendments give the court discretion to make exceptions to those requirements if justified by the facts.
Note: This is the language of the current Federal Rule 35(b) and authorizes the party examined to request a copy of the report of the examination ordered by the court. Upon delivery the party who obtained the order for the physical examination may obtain from the examined party, copies of all of its reports on the same subject. Conceivably that party could obtain the same information by deposing the physicians who made other examinations, but it certainly is easier and more efficient to provide for the automatic exchange of medical reports on the same condition. The purpose of the rule is to encourage settlement when it is apparent that there is no significant difference in the medical opinion of the respective experts.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 35 comes into play when a lawsuit turns on someone's physical or mental condition — a claimed injury, a disputed capacity, a blood relationship. A party cannot insist the other side see a doctor of its choosing without more. It has to file a motion, show good cause, and give notice to everyone involved, and the resulting order has to spell out the time, place, scope, and examiner. South Carolina adds a threshold the federal rule does not have: the case must involve more than $100,000 in actual damages before a court can order the exam at all.
The rule also protects the person being examined in ways federal practice does not. That person's own physician may sit in on the exam. The exam itself generally has to take place in the county where the examinee or the examinee's physician lives, though a court can depart from that for good cause. And if the party seeking the exam has proposed a particular doctor, the other side can object, and the court will pick someone else if the parties cannot agree — though which doctor conducted the exam is not something a jury gets to hear about at trial.
Once an exam happens, Rule 35(b) forces both sides to show their cards. The examined party can demand a full written report — findings, test results, diagnoses — and once that report changes hands, the party who obtained the exam can demand copies of any other reports the examined party has on the same condition. Requesting that report carries a cost: it waives any privilege the examined party might otherwise claim over what other doctors who examined the same condition have to say, in this case or any related one.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the $100,000 threshold apply to every discovery request?
No. It is specific to Rule 35 examinations. A party cannot be ordered to submit to a physical or mental exam unless the case involves more than $100,000 in actual damages, but other discovery tools under Rule 26 and following are not tied to that figure.
Can I have my own doctor present during a court-ordered exam?
Yes. Rule 35(a) allows the physician of the party being examined to attend the examination.
Where does the examination have to take place?
Ordinarily in the county where the person being examined lives, or where that person's physician lives. The court can order otherwise if the parties agree or if good cause is shown.
What if I object to the doctor the other side wants to use?
You can raise a reasonable objection. If the parties cannot agree on an examiner, the court will designate one. The fact that the court had to pick the doctor is not admissible at trial.
Do I give anything up by requesting a copy of the examination report?
Yes. Requesting and receiving the report, or deposing the examining physician, waives any privilege over testimony from every other doctor who has examined or later examines the same condition, in that case or a related one.
Source & verification. Rule text, official Notes, and amendment
history are reproduced verbatim from the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure,
adopted by the Supreme Court of South Carolina. Last verified July 13, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as:independent medical examination South CarolinaIME SCRCPcompulsory physical exam rulemental examination discovery SCRule 35 exam