This program will explore the nuances of Rule 35 mental health examinations
when the mental condition of a party is at issue in a contested custody
dispute.
Join us for a lively discussion with our distinguished panel regarding the
unique considerations associated with Rule 35 examinations and their attendant
issues, including:
- The tools practitioners must use to effectively
request and prepare for an examination;
- Under what circumstances a request for an examination
may be allowed by the court;
- The process for conducting the examination;
- The types of mental health issues that are relevant
to custody disputes;
- Tips for attorneys and their clients/case when an
examination has been ordered;
- How to appropriately utilize the examination report;
and
- The weight the court affords to Rule 35 examination reports.
Panelists will offer an in-depth exploration of this topic from multiple perspectives,
including from practitioners who are advocating to compel a mental examination
of an adverse party, those opposing or seeking to limit the scope of such
a request, and a judge, who is required to assess the appropriateness of
permitting such an examination in determining the best interests of a child in
custody disputes. Participants will also hear from an expert who performs Rule
35 evaluations, including what, if any, additional testing may be recommended by
the evaluator to assist practitioners and the court.
This session was hosted using
Zoom.
Faculty:
Julianna Zane, Esq., Program Chair
Todd & Weld LLP, Boston
Hon. Jennifer Allen, Panelist
Massachusetts Probate and Family Court-Administrative Office, Boston
Alexander D. Jones, Esq., Panelist
Brick, Jones, McBrien & Hickey LLP, Needham
Katherine Nemens, Esq., Panelist
Family Law Project at Mental Health Legal Advisors Committee, Quincy
Julia M. Reade, M.D., Panelist
Comprehensive Forensic Associates, Chestnut Hill