Kickbacks, or Care?

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. in 2021 sued Tampa Bay chiropractor Michael LaRocca and several of his dozen clinics that specialized in car accident injuries. State Farm, under Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, sought back $2.7 million it paid to treat people it insured. It said the treatments weren't medically necessary and, in a novel theory, alleged a LaRocca marketing approach — labeled by State Farm as a "kickback scheme" — violated his duty under the law to be legally responsible for his clinic's compliance with state patient brokering and antikickback laws. At the trial level in 2023, the judge wouldn't let State Farm present its argument on legal responsibility so, instead, State Farm built a case on medical necessity, which it lost. State Farm appealed to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which kicked the case to the Florida Supreme Court for it to define what "legally responsible" means under Florida law. Oral argument was held in February. The Florida Chiropractic Association filed a brief in LaRocca's support: "A negative outcome of this decision could be tragic for the profession, namely, those owners of health care clinics treating auto accident patients," said the Florida Chiropractic Association in an online post.