Lack of Standing Requires Dismissal
Post 5008
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gvSemwVK, See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gcH7RrhH and at https://lnkd.in/gqmF2Jqi, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5000 posts.
Chutzpah: Attempt to Use Federal Court to Obtain a Share of the Proceeds of an Insurance Fraud
Tyanna Dodson is a chiropractor who sought compensation from ExamWorks, L.L.C.'s ("ExamWorks" ), a medical billing and scheduling provider. Dodson alleged that ExamWorks over-billed her patients' insurers for her services to insurers for independent medical exams (IME) she conducted.
In Tyanna Dodson, Doctor of Chiropractic v. ExamWorks, L.L.C., No. 24-50248, the United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (on February 28, 2025) Dodson contended that the IME's she conducted to help insurers defeat attempted insurance fraud were billed by ExamWorks fraudulently overcharging he insurer clients. She sued EamWorks for half of the excessive billing and damages because she faced discipline and charges of insurance fraud. The District Court found that she had no standing to bring the suit and ignored the fact that she sued in federal court to gain a share of the proceeds of a fraud.
FACTS
Dodson had entered into a contract with Landmark Exams in 2015, which was later acquired by ExamWorks. She terminated her agreement with ExamWorks in 2018, claiming mishandling of billing for over 80 IMEs (Independent Medical Examinations) she conducted in 2017 and 2018. Dodson sued ExamWorks for overbilling insurers and billing for services she did not perform, bringing claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, and declaratory judgment. She alleged injury from ExamWorks's failure to give her half of its allegedly ill-gotten gains and the risk of professional discipline and criminal liability.
ExamWorks moved to dismiss Dodson's First Amended Complaint for lack of standing and for judgment on the pleadings. The district court dismissed the case. Dodson's appeal contended that the district court erroneously concluded she lacked standing and abused its discretion by denying her motion to amend the judgment.
DECISION
The Fifth Circuit reviewed the case and found that Dodson failed to demonstrate a sufficient injury-in-fact. Dodson's claims of harm from ExamWorks withholding her cut of proceeds from fraudulent billing and the risk of future civil and criminal liability were deemed insufficient.
ANALYSIS
To satisfy Article III standing, a plaintiff must show that:
(1) she has suffered an "injury in fact,"
(2) that the injury "likely was caused or likely will be caused" by the defendant, and
(3) the injury is likely to be "redressed by the requested judicial relief."
Dodson presents a long list of purported injuries which essentially collapse into two for standing purposes: (1) ExamWorks withheld Dodson's cut of its proceeds from fraudulent billing, and (2) she now faces a risk of harm from potential future civil and criminal liability.
DEMAND FOR CUT OF FRAUDULENT CLAIMS
For her cut of the purportedly ill-gotten gains, Dodson alleged that she suffered "benefit of the bargain damages" from ExamWorks's alleged breach of contract. She stated that ExamWorks breached its contract when it "fraudulently billed and overbilled for [her IMEs] and related services without . . . providing [her] with the appropriate fee(s) which she was entitled to as per the parties' contract."
Dodson already received all the proceeds that she could legally receive under her contract. Even if Dodson had suffered such harm, it would not have been to a legally protected interest. To the extent that Dodson seeks to use federal courts to pursue her cut of allegedly illegally obtained funds, does not suffice for Article III standing.
ExamWorks observed that the time bar eliminates Dodson's risk of any professional discipline related to her allegations, which all allegedly occurred in 2018 and before. Any risk of injury that Dodson faces from potential future action by regulators is too speculative for Article III purposes.
Because she has not pleaded sufficient injury for Article III standing, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of this case and its denial of Dodson's motion to alter or amend the judgment.
ZALMA OPINION
"Chutzpah" is a Yiddish term that has found its way into the English language. It is defined as unmitigated gall and defined by the example of a person convicted of murdering his parents and seeking mercy from the court because he is an orphan. Dr. Dodson's claim for half of the illegally obtained fees by filing suit in the federal courts is, on its face, not only a claim without standing, it is conduct asking the court to assist her in obtaining "her share" of fraudulent billing.
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg
Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gmmzUVBy
Go to X @bzalma; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
Jury’s Findings Interpreting Insurance Contract Affirmed
Post 5105
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gPa6Vpg8 and at https://lnkd.in/ghgiZNBN, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5100 posts.
Madelaine Chocolate Novelties, Inc. (“Madelaine Chocolate”) appealed the district court’s judgment following a jury verdict in favor of Great Northern Insurance Company (“Great Northern”) concerning storm-surge damage caused by “Superstorm Sandy” to Madelaine Chocolate’s production facilities.
In Madelaine Chocolate Novelties, Inc., d.b.a. The Madelaine Chocolate Company v. Great Northern Insurance Company, No. 23-212, United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit (June 20, 2025) affirmed the trial court ruling in favor of the insurer.
BACKGROUND
Great Northern refused to pay the full claim amount and paid Madelaine Chocolate only about $4 million. In disclaiming coverage, Great Northern invoked the Policy’s flood-exclusion provision, which excludes, in relevant part, “loss or damage caused by ....
Failure to Name a Party as an Additional Insured Defeats Claim
Post 5104
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gbcTYSNa, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/ggmDyTnT and at https://lnkd.in/gZ-uZPh7, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5100 posts.
Contract Interpretation is Based on the Clear and Unambiguous Language of the Policy
In Associated Industries Insurance Company, Inc. v. Sentinel Insurance Company, Ltd., No. 23-CV-10400 (MMG), United States District Court, S.D. New York (June 16, 2025) an insurance coverage dispute arising from a personal injury action in New York State Supreme Court.
The underlying action, Eduardo Molina v. Venchi 2, LLC, et al., concerned injuries allegedly resulting from a construction accident at premises owned by Central Area Equities Associates LLC (CAEA) and leased by Venchi 2 LLC with the USDC required to determine who was entitled to a defense from which insurer.
KEY POINTS
Parties Involved:
CAEA is insured by Associated Industries Insurance Company, Inc. ...
Exclusion Establishes that There is No Duty to Defend Off Site Injuries
Post 5103
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/geje73Gh, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gnQp4X-f and at https://lnkd.in/gPPrB47p, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5100 posts.
Attack by Vicious Dog Excluded
In Foremost Insurance Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan v. Michael B. Steele and Sarah Brown and Kevin Lee Price, Civil Action No. 3:24-CV-00684, United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania (June 16, 2025)
Foremost Insurance Company (“Foremost”) sued Michael B. Steele (“Steele”), Sarah Brown (“Brown”), and Kevin Lee Price (“Price”) (collectively, “Defendants”). Foremost sought declaratory relief in the form of a declaration that
1. it owes no insurance coverage to Steele and has no duty to defend or indemnify Steele in an underlying tort action and
2. defense counsel that Foremost has assigned to Steele in the underlying action may withdraw his appearance.
Presently before the Court are two ...
ZIFL Volume 29, Issue 10
The Source for the Insurance Fraud Professional
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gK_P4-BK and at https://lnkd.in/g2Q7BHBu, and at https://zalma.com/blog and at https://lnkd.in/gjyMWHff.
Zalma’s Insurance Fraud Letter (ZIFL) continues its 29th year of publication dedicated to those involved in reducing the effect of insurance fraud. ZIFL is published 24 times a year by ClaimSchool and is written by Barry Zalma. It is provided FREE to anyone who visits the site at http://zalma.com/zalmas-insurance-fraud-letter-2/ You can read the full issue of the May 15, 2025 issue at http://zalma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/ZIFL-05-15-2025.pdf
This issue contains the following articles about insurance fraud:
Health Care Fraud Trial Results in Murder for Hire of Witness
To Avoid Conviction for Insurance Fraud Defendants Murder Witness
In United States of America v. Louis Age, Jr.; Stanton Guillory; Louis Age, III; Ronald Wilson, Jr., No. 22-30656, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (April 25, 2025) the Fifth Circuit dealt with the ...
Professional Health Care Services Exclusion Effective
Post 5073
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/g-f6Tjm5 and at https://lnkd.in/gx3agRzi, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5050 posts.
This opinion is the recommendation of a Magistrate Judge to the District Court Judge and involves Travelers Casualty Insurance Company and its duty to defend the New Mexico Bone and Joint Institute (NMBJI) and its physicians in a medical negligence lawsuit brought by Tervon Dorsey.
In Travelers Casualty Insurance Company Of America v. New Mexico Bone And Joint Institute, P.C.; American Foundation Of Lower Extremity Surgery And Research, Inc., a New Mexico Corporation; Riley Rampton, DPM; Loren K. Spencer, DPM; Tervon Dorsey, individually; Kimberly Dorsey, individually; and Kate Ferlic as Guardian Ad Litem for K.D. and J.D., minors, No. 2:24-cv-0027 MV/DLM, United States District Court, D. New Mexico (May 8, 2025) the Magistrate Judge Recommended:
Insurance Coverage Dispute:
Travelers issued a Commercial General Liability ...
A Heads I Win, Tails You Lose Story
Post 5062
Posted on April 30, 2025 by Barry Zalma
"This is a Fictionalized True Crime Story of Insurance Fraud that explains why Insurance Fraud is a “Heads I Win, Tails You Lose” situation for Insurers. The story is designed to help everyone to Understand How Insurance Fraud in America is Costing Everyone who Buys Insurance Thousands of Dollars Every year and Why Insurance Fraud is Safer and More Profitable for the Perpetrators than any Other Crime."
Immigrant Criminals Attempt to Profit From Insurance Fraud
People who commit insurance fraud as a profession do so because it is easy. It requires no capital investment. The risk is low and the profits are high. The ease with which large amounts of money can be made from insurance fraud removes whatever moral hesitation might stop the perpetrator from committing the crime.
The temptation to do everything outside the law was the downfall of the brothers Karamazov. The brothers had escaped prison in the old Soviet Union by immigrating to the United...
