## Facts

- Clara L. Botsford was a paying passenger in a sleeping car operated by Union Pacific Railway Company.
- She alleged an upper berth fell and struck her head due to the railroad’s negligent construction and care of the berth.
- Botsford claimed severe and permanent injuries, including concussion and damage affecting the brain and spinal cord.
- Union Pacific filed a general denial.
- Three days before trial, Union Pacific moved for an order requiring Botsford to submit to a physical (surgical) examination by the railroad’s surgeon, with proposed safeguards (no indecent exposure; presence of her physician and attorneys if desired).
- The trial court denied the motion, stating it had no legal right or power to make and enforce such an order.
- A jury returned a verdict for Botsford, and judgment entered for $10,000.
- Union Pacific sought Supreme Court review, challenging the refusal to compel the examination.

## Issues

1. Whether a federal court, in a civil personal-injury action, may order a plaintiff—without consent—to submit before trial to a physical/surgical examination at the defendant’s request.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for Botsford.
- The Court held that the trial court lacked legal right or power, under common law or statute, to compel a nonconsensual physical/surgical examination of the plaintiff.
- Justices Brewer and Brown dissented, favoring judicial authority to order an examination with safeguards when needed to test injury claims.

## Legal Principles

- The common law strongly protects bodily integrity and personal security; interference with a person’s body requires clear and unquestionable legal authority.
- Absent statutory authorization or established common-law power, federal courts may not compel a civil litigant to undergo a physical/surgical examination for evidentiary purposes.
- A court’s general authority over litigation procedures does not, by itself, permit compelled bodily intrusion.

## Conclusion

The Court concluded that, without explicit legal authorization, a federal trial court cannot require a personal-injury plaintiff to submit to a physical examination against her will, and it therefore upheld the trial court’s denial of the railroad’s motion and the plaintiff’s judgment.


Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. Botsford, 141 U.S. 250 (1891)