On October 8, 2008, bankruptcy Judge Brown in New Orleans signed a Memorandum Opinion, finding in favor of OCA and against Dr. Darrin Cupo on an alleged violation of the Second Order.  [US Bankruptcy Court Eastern District of Louisiana, case 06-10179.]   According to the MO, the doctor hadn't filed any sort of notice of default of termination or default prior to OCA's filing of bankruptcy in March, 2006.  The court ordered all affiliates who hadn't objected to continue performing under the contract. (Second Order P-46) Dr. Cupo signed a stipulation agreeing to continue performance under his BSA.

 

According to the MO in June, 2007, Dr. C sent OCA a notice of default stating that he'd learned that OCA was planning on opening another office less than 1 mile from his office.  The Business Services Agreement (contract) apparently prohibited OCA from being involved with any office less than 5 miles from Dr. C's office.  In July, he stopped depositing and sent a Notice of Termination and filed a lawsuit in federal court in Florida.  OCA responded by filing an action against the doctor.

 

The court didn't rule on the doctor's claim that OCA had violated the terms of his contract, leaving that decision for the District Court in Florida.  It did, however, award OCA $168,553.21 in sanctions, plus interest, plus an estimated $27,956 in attorneys' fees incurred by OCA.  The sanctions amount was calculated based on service fees which would have been received by OCA had the doctor continued depositing.  The bankruptcy court was unwilling to force Dr. Cupo to continue performance under his BSA, that matter presumably being in the hands of the Florida District Court.

 

OCA is continuing to attempt to recruit new affiliates, though they don't appear to be having all that much success?  (Are they even keeping up with attrition of the existing affiliate base?) Could it be that events like this continue to tarnish their already negative reputation?  Their brochures appear to promise above average income, less days in the office, and decreased management headaches, and less stress generally.  Of course there's no mention of the hundreds of unhappy docs, lawsuits, and exceedingly stressful experiences encountered by unhappy affiliates since their going public in the mid 90s.  Nor is there any mention of their overcharges and accounting irregularities, as evidenced by Jr.s' recent admission before the SEC and by docs who have successfully challenged them.  I'd suspect that their reputation won't allow much success in recruiting new docs for quite some time to come? 

 

The forgoing is entirely my own, personal opinion, based on my non-lawyer's reading of the October 8, 2008, Memorandum Order and past experiences with OCA.   For further information, the Memorandum Order and all other related OCA litigation documents are presumably available on PACER.  For legal advise and case analysis, consult a licensed attorney.