Allstate Insurance Company v. Nguyen

Background

Allstate Insurance Company, Allstate Property and Casualty Company, and Allstate Indemnity Company sued Huy Ngoc Nguyen, D.C.; Healthcare Chiropractic Clinic, Inc.; Northwest MRI Center, Inc.; and Accident Recovery Chiropractic, P.A. The opinion states that Healthcare Chiropractic Clinic was later called Accident Recovery Chiropractic, and Northwest MRI Center was later called Midwest MRI Center. Earlier in the case, the court dismissed all claims against Nguyen’s ex-wife, Mimi Doan, and Midwest MRI Center. The remaining claims were against Nguyen, the clinic entities, and Northwest MRI Center.

Allstate alleged that the defendants operated a fraudulent scheme involving automobile-accident patients and no-fault insurance benefits. According to the evidence described by the court, the defendants solicited accident victims, paid people for referrals, rushed or failed to provide treatments, instructed patients to sign for treatments they did not receive, used improper billing practices, coached patients about what to tell insurers, and billed insurers for treatment time or procedures that were not provided as represented. The defendants also referred patients to Nguyen’s diagnostic-imaging center, generating additional insurance payments.

The complaint contained seven counts involving civil racketeering and conspiracy, common-law fraud, no-fault fraud, unjust enrichment, disgorgement, and declaratory relief. Allstate sought $832,950 that it said it had paid the defendant entities since January 1, 2010, for treatment of Allstate-insured patients. The opinion also states that Nguyen, Doan, and a business associate pleaded guilty to wire fraud in 2018, and that Nguyen agreed to pay restitution but had not done so.

Motions and Analysis

Allstate moved for summary judgment on all counts. Summary judgment is a decision without a trial when the evidence shows that no material fact is genuinely disputed and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law. The defendants argued that Nguyen’s post-conviction deposition testimony conflicted with the other evidence and prevented summary judgment.

The court rejected that argument. It found that the defendants did not identify a specific disputed fact and that Nguyen had repeatedly admitted the conduct described in the complaint, including during his guilty plea, a proceeding concerning his chiropractic license, and his sentencing hearing. The court also applied judicial estoppel, a rule that prevents a party from taking a position in one legal proceeding that conflicts with a position previously taken in another proceeding.

The defendants separately moved for judgment on the pleadings, a motion asking the court to decide the case based only on the pleadings. The court’s discussion says that motion was moot after granting Allstate summary judgment. The formal order states that Allstate’s amended motion for summary judgment was GRANTED and that the defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings was DENIED.

Disposition

The court granted Allstate’s amended motion for summary judgment and directed that judgment be entered accordingly. It denied the defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. The opinion does not state whether the judgment included a specific damages amount beyond identifying Allstate’s requested recovery of $832,950.