Login


Notice: Passwords are now case-sensitive

Remember Me
Register a new account
Forgot your password?
Case Name Davis v. Board of Chiropractic Examiners
Date 04/12/2010
Note Board Regulation section 318 is not a safe harbor provision exonerating plaintiff for his negligent acts, and the prohibition for 'excessive treatment' is not unconstitutionally vague.
Citation C059588
WCC Citation WCC 36142010 CA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) PAUL JEFFREY DAVIS, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BOARD OF CHIROPRACTIC EXAMINERS, Defendant and Respondent. Ct. No. 07CS00697) The Board of Chiropractic Examiners (Board) spent over $72,000 in its disciplinary proceedings against Dr. Paul Davis, a 20-year veteran chiropractor in both neurology and orthopedics, for his treatment and billing of a single patient who suffered two industrial accidents at two places of employment with different insurers. Dr. Davis and his wife both testified that he had very little to do with the billing practices in his chiropractic offices. Unlike Dr. Davis and his expert, Michael Martello, D. C. , Dr. Stahl is not a chiropractic orthopedist or a qualified medical examiner (QME). Dr. Martello testified the Board had not codified any standard of care for the treatment of chiropractic patients in California.

Download full case here.