Jesus Alexander Diaz Cabrera v. Abilio Andres Ortega Cabrera
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledSeptember 30, 2026
Docket3D2026-1403
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed September 30, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D26-1403
Lower Tribunal No. 25-16322-CA-01
________________
Jesus Alexander Diaz Cabrera, et al.,
Petitioners,
vs.
Abilio Andres Ortega Cabrera,
Respondent.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade
County, Vivianne del Rio, Judge.
Wasson & Associates, Chartered, and Roy D. Wasson; Carey Leisure
Carney, and John N. Cain, Jr. (Clearwater), for petitioners.
Luks, Santaniello, Petrillo, Cohen & Peterfriend, and Edgardo
Ferreyra, Jr., and J. Marcos Martinez, for respondent.
Before SCALES, C.J., and FERNANDEZ and BOKOR, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
In this personal injury action resulting from a March 14, 2024
automobile accident occurring in Miami-Dade County, Florida, Jesus
Alexander Diaz Cabrera and Addanelys Almenares Mendoza (“Petitioners”),
the plaintiffs below, seek a writ of certiorari to quash the trial court’s June 21,
2026 discovery order (the “Challenged Order”). The Challenged Order
denied Petitioners’ joint motion for a protective order, thus requiring
Petitioners, who now live in Texas, to submit to compulsory medical
examinations in Miami-Dade County. We deny the petition.
When, as here, the physical condition of a plaintiff “is in controversy,”
the defendant may request that the plaintiff submit to a physical examination.
See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.360(a)(1)(A). “The request shall specify a reasonable
time, place, manner, conditions, and scope of the examination and the
person or persons by whom the examination is to be made.” Id. (emphasis
added).
As has been explained by the Fifth District:
There is no hard and fast rule in these kinds of cases, and the
abuse of discretion standard applies. Florida Rule of Civil
Procedure 1.360 only states that the request for an examination
must specify a reasonable place. Courts have upheld rulings
requiring parties to travel outside of their home counties.
Scales v. Swill, 715 So. 2d 1059, 1060 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998).
2
The place of a physical examination is a “matter of the trial court’s
discretion.” McKenney v. Airport Rent-A-Car, Inc., 686 So. 2d 771, 773 (Fla.
4th DCA 1997). We discern no abuse of discretion in ordering Petitioners’
examinations be conducted in Miami-Dade County, especially considering
that the accident occurred in Miami-Dade County and Respondent has
agreed to pay Petitioners’ reasonable and documented travel expenses.
We deny the petition because Petitioners have failed to establish any
departure from the essential requirements of law. Id.
Petition denied.
3