Brain Injury Lawyer

The issue of third party observation at defense neuropsychological evaluations continues to be controversial in the neuropsychological field as well as the legal field. Defense neuropsychologists raise the specter that a third party observer may invalidate test results while plaintiffs attorneys argue defense neuropsychological evaluations are not independent, but adversarial, necessitating the presence of a third person to verify statements alleged by defense neuropsychologists.
 
Recently, this issue was the subject of a hearing in the State of Louisiana. The defendants requested that the plaintiff undergo a defense neuropsychological evaluation. Plaintiff’s counsel requested that his client be accompanied by a third person. The defense objected, noting that such a request violated the 2001 National Academy of Neuropsychology (NAN) policy on third party observers and the 2009 NAN policy against secretive recording of neuropsychological testing and interviewing. 
 
The plaintiff submitted Linda Lindman’s Ph.D. research and dissertation, which found no observer effect on neuropsychological test or examination scores or results. After reading the filed papers, the Court entered an Order in favor of the plaintiff stating the neuropsychological IME could be video recorded from behind a one way mirror. The Court also ordered that the plaintiff not assert any potential ethical violations, as perceived by NAN, against the defense neuropsychologist for the videotaping the IME from behind a one way mirror. Day v. Valley Forge Insurance Company, 21st Judicial District Court for the Parish of Livingston, State of Louisiana, Division "B," Number 122923.