State Farm v. 21737
In State Farm v. 21737 filed in 2017, State Farm claimed that there were five clinics holding themselves out to be owned by five different chiropractors, however, they were actually owned by Mr. Boris (non-medical professional).
A State Farm SIU adjuster went to one of the clinics and interviewed an associate chiropractor who was treating the clinic’s patients. The chiropractor stated that the “owner” was Mr. Boris and that she never saw or met the person who was listed on sunbiz.org as the President/Owner. In other words, she stated that the chiropractor who owned the clinic never “supervised the clinic” which is still required even if the clinic is “wholly owned” by that chiropractor. See FS 400.9905(f)
Also, even though there are five clinics, and they are all owned by different chiropractors on sunbiz.org, they all used the same mobile MRI company and the same traveling NCV testing company for all their patients—something you would expect from five clinics owned by the same person—not five different people. At depositions, the doctors listed as President on sunbiz.org didn’t know the name of the mobile MRI company or the NCV testing company that came to their offices every week.
All of this was evidence that the clinic was not “wholly owned” by the doctor which means State Farm was owed all of the money it previously paid to this clinic! The owners also went to prison in this case and kept operating even after they were raided by the federal government!
DISCLAIMER
This is based on a real court case that was previously filed against a medical provider/doctor. The case number has been partially redacted and names have been changed to protect the Defendants’ names. This example is posted to help educate others on the laws and potential pitfalls. This posting is not intended to embarrass or defame anyone. I have limited the information and simplified some of the facts in the lawsuit to reflect key points and make a complicated case easier to understand. This “example” is directly from a complaint filed by an insurance company; therefore, I am using the facts THEY presented. There are always two sides to a story so please understand this is just one side of the story. This information was found through records available to the public.