STATE FARM AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY et al v. RIOS et al
MEMORANDUM. ( SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDMUND V. LUDWIG ON 1/22/10. ) 1/25/10 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(gn, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA S T A T E FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE IN S U R A N C E COMPANY, et al. v. S T E P H E N M. RIOS, D.C., et al. : : : : : : C IV IL ACTION
N o . 06-2048
MEMORANDUM L u d w ig , J. January 22, 2010
T h is is an insurance fraud case. Jurisdiction is diversity. 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Plaintiffs move fo r partial summary judgment. Defendants have not responded to the motion. The motion will be g r a n te d . In 2006, plaintiffs State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Company commenced this action against defendants Stephen M. Rios, M.D. a n d Rios Chiropractic Center. The complaint alleged that, beginning in 1997, defendants
s u b m itte d bills to plaintiffs for treatment rendered to more than 250 individuals who were either in su red by State Farm or involved in accidents with State Farm insureds. Further, however, d e fe n d a n ts billed for examinations that were not performed and treatments not rendered. Also, the d ia g n o se s given by defendants were untrue or were exaggerated for the purpose of justifying d efe n d an ts' billings. The complaint makes claim for common law fraud (Count I), statutory in su ra n c e fraud (Counts II and III, and unjust enrichment (Count IV). It requests damages in e x c e s s of $1.7 million - representing payments plaintiffs made in reliance on reports, notes and b i lls generated by defendants. T h e evidence submitted consists of the expert reports of Joseph R. Verna, D.C., a
c h iro p rac tic auditing professional, who reviewed more than 250 claim files involving State Farm in s u re d s and third-party claimants examined and treated by defendants between 1997 and 2009. M o tio n , ¶ 7, and Exhibits B and C. The record also includes the deposition testimony and tre a tm e n t files of eight former patients of defendants, Exhibits F through S, and investigative r e p o r ts based on surveillance videos of four additional former patients, plus their treatment files, E x h ib i ts T through Z. Billing statements for the foregoing 12 patients also substantiate plaintiffs' c la im s . T h e evidence of record is undisputed. There is no genuine issue of material fact, and p l a in t if fs are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on all claims. A n assessment of damages hearing will be scheduled by separate order.
B Y THE COURT:
/s/ Edmund V. Ludwig Edmund V. Ludwig, J.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?