ACA denied motion for Trigon rehearing

The American Chiropractic Association (ACA) announced its intention to continue pursuing its so‑far unsuccessful lawsuit against Trigon Blue Cross Blue Shield, even though the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit rejected the organization's petition to rehear the case.

The case, which was originally filed in August 2000, has ‑‑ together with the ACA's lawsuit against the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ‑‑ cost the chiropractic profession an estimated $5‑7 million.

The lawsuit accused Trigon and Blue Cross & Blue Shield of America of eight counts of racketeering, extortion, mail fraud and antitrust violations and other state and federal law violations.

The lawsuit fizzled when the ACA voluntarily dismissed Blue Cross as a defendant and the court dismissed two of the counts in July 2001.

On April 25, 2003, the other counts were dropped when U.S. Federal Judge James P. Jones ruled in a summary judgment that there were "no genuine issues of material fact remaining for trial." The opinion explained that summary judgment is a tool designed for "weeding out claims and defenses that have no factual basis."

The ACA filed an appeal despite recommendations from other segments of the chiropractic profession that the money being pumped into the litigation could best be spent on legislation, public relations, research or other positive activities. The ACA lost the appeal and was denied a request for a rehearing.

Still, the ACA refuses to let go of the campaign, which it has touted as its primary service to the profession.

Now, according to ACA Chairman of the Board George McClelland, DC, the group intends to try to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The ACA and other plaintiffs have 90 days to file a writ of certiorari, asking the Supreme Court to hear the case. Less than one percent of cases decided by federal appeals courts are heard by the Supreme Court.

The ACA also is continuing to solicit funds for its National Chiropractic Legal Action Fund, which received thousands of donations from chiropractors and chiropractic organizations after promoting the litigation as a "save our subluxation" campaign. Although initially in favor of the stated goals of the legal action, many doctors were disillusioned by the results and by the ACA's failure to give reciprocal support to efforts by other organizations.

In 2003, the Chiropractic Coalition ‑‑ made up of the World Chiropractic Alliance, the International Chiropractors Association and the Federation of Straight Chiropractors and Organizations ‑‑ issued a position paper cautioning that, "a lawsuit is an extremely time‑consuming and expensive tactic. The National Chiropractic Legal Action Fund (NCLAF), formed to fund the ACA lawsuit, has reportedly already cost the profession more than $5 million, according the ACA reports ... It is the opinion of the Chiropractic Coalition that this money could be better spent on funding subluxation‑based research, conducting public relations, engaging in national and international legislative efforts, and other much needed programs to protect and promote the chiropractic profession. Therefore, the Chiropractic Coalition can no longer encourage doctors to provide additional contributions to the NCLAF."

The ACA has not released any details about the amount already spent on the lawsuits or the projected cost for filing and/or arguing the case before the Supreme Court.