Second DC Files Lawsuit Against Pro-Solutions

Published: 2010-07-06 22:13:17
Author: Dynamic Chiropractic | April 22, 2010

A second lawsuit has been filed by a ProAdjuster owner against Pro-Solutions, this time by a chiropractor in Iowa.1 The first known action by a DC against Pro-Solutions, which sells the ProAdjuster equipment and related services, was filed by a Texas chiropractor in May of last year as a cross-complaint in an action with her leasing company.2,3

While there has been talk of other lawsuits being filed against Pro-Solutions by some of its clients, the Iowa filing is only the second to surface thus far.

The most recent action was filed on March 1, 2010, and like the first suit, is part of a larger lawsuit involving the doctor and his leasing company. And as was true with the first lawsuit, the issue does not appear to be with the basic equipment itself. Both actions have been taken as part of an effort by the doctors to negate their liability in the lease agreements they signed. Both actions suggest that had the doctors not relied on statements made by Pro-Solutions, the doctors would not have signed the lease agreements or purchased the equipment.

For example, the Iowa suit alleges that at a seminar attended by the plaintiff, Pro-Solutions representatives, including company president Maurice (Mo) Pisciottano, "made various false and misleading statements" in attempting to induce the doctor to purchase the equipment, including that the doctor's business would triple and his bottom line would increase by 27 percent. The 10-page Iowa action also focuses on purported promises made by Pro-Solutions that would have allowed the doctor to return the equipment if unsatisfied or unsuccessful.

It is also apparent that in both cases, the doctors expected to have a certain amount of recourse with Pro-Solutions after they signed the lease. The Iowa suit mentions "Pisciottano's and Pro-Solutions' willing refusal to abide by the terms of the promises" made to the doctor, "including money-back guarantees and the Replacement Contract." According to the suit, those "promises" induced the doctor to sign a lease agreement he ultimately could not afford to maintain. In fact, the Iowa suit states clearly that the doctor's inability to make lease payments is the "sole basis of the underlying suit currently pending."

Full story