Electronic medical records (EMRs), particularly in neurology, are inherently heterogeneous, sparse, and noisy, which poses significant challenges for large language models (LLMs) in clinical diagnosis. In such settings, single-agent systems are vulnerable to self-reinforcing errors, as their predictions lack independent validation and can drift toward spurious conclusions. Although recent multi-agent frameworks attempt to mitigate this issue through collaborative reasoning, their interactions are often shallow and loosely structured, failing to reflect the rigorous, evidence-driven processes used by clinical experts. More fundamentally, existing approaches largely ignore the rich logical dependencies among diseases, such as mutual exclusivity, pathological compatibility, and diagnostic confusion. This limitation prevents them from ruling out clinically implausible hypotheses, even when sufficient evidence is available. To overcome these, we propose RE-MCDF, a relation-enhanced multi-expert clinical diagnosis framework. RE-MCDF introduces a generation--verification--revision closed-loop architecture that integrates three complementary components: (i) a primary expert that generates candidate diagnoses and supporting evidence, (ii) a laboratory expert that dynamically prioritizes heterogeneous clinical indicators, and (iii) a multi-relation awareness and evaluation expert group that explicitly enforces inter-disease logical constraints. Guided by a medical knowledge graph (MKG), the first two experts adaptively reweight EMR evidence, while the expert group validates and corrects candidate diagnoses to ensure logical consistency. Extensive experiments on the neurology subset of CMEMR (NEEMRs) and on our curated dataset (XMEMRs) demonstrate that RE-MCDF consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in complex diagnostic scenarios (https://github.com/shenshaowei/RE-MCDF).