Disciplinary Actions against Lloyd A. Wright, D.C.


Stephen Barrett, M.D.
September 14, 2020

In 1997, the Florida Department of Health charged that Lloyd A. Wright, D.C., had treated a patient many times without documenting a need the amount of service. The administrative complaint (shown below) stated:

  • Between November 1988 and April 1995, the patient received chiropractic care approximately 205 times.
  • Between March 1993 and December 1994 the patient had undergone 29 separate Metrecom tests. [The Metrecom skeletal analysis system is a  computerized goniometer designed for postural evaluation, spinal analysis, and measurements of joint range of motion. Aetna considers it “experimental” because its use has not been proven to improve treatment outcome.]
  • Wright failed to reduce the frequency of tests or spinal adjustments after maximum medical improvement was reached in December 1990.
  • Wright’s records did not justify the extent, frequency, total amount, or type of treatment he administered.

In 2008, the case was settled with a stipulation in which Wright agreed to (a) pay an administrative fine of $2,000 plus up to $750 for the cost of processing the case, (b)serve six months on probation, during which his practice would be monitored, and (c) complete 25 hours of continuing education that included at least one unit on record-keeping. 

In 2002, the board charged Wright with exerting influence over a patient for financial gain by ordering excessive tests without documenting a need for the tests. The case was settled in 2007 by a stipulation in which Wright agreed to (a) receive a letter of concern, (b) pay a $2,500 fine plus $5,000 for administrative costs, (c) take 5 additional hours of continuing education, and (d) serve probation with monitoring for two years. In 2008, the Department of Health suspended Wright’s license for failing to pay the $7,500.

Wright began practicing in Florida in 1977. In 1980, a former patient sent me court documents indicating that Wright had sued him for refusing to pay for treatment of acne. The cost included a charge of $65 for a worthless hair analysis test. The judge dismissed the case after concluding (based on expert testimony) that it was inappropriate for a chiropractor to treat acne. However, a motion for a new trial was granted, and I don’t know what happened after that.


STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,

PETITIONER,

vs.

LLOYD A. WRIGHT, D.C.

RESPONDENT.


CASE NUMBER: 95-14457

ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT

COMES NOW, the Petitioner, the Department of Health, hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner”, and files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Chiropractic against LLOYD A. WRIGHT, D.C., hereinafter referred to as “Respondent”, and alleges:

  1. Effective July 1, 1997, Petitioner is the state agency charged with the regulating the practice of chiropractic pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1996); Chapter 455, Florida Statutes: and Chapter 460t Florida Statutes. Pursuant to the authority of Section 20.43 (3) (f), Florida Statutes, the Petitioner has contracted with the Agency of Health Care Administration to provide consumer complaint, investigative, and prosecutorial services required by the Division of Medical Quality Assurance, councils; or boards, as appropriate.
  2. Respondent is, and has been at all times material hereto, a licensed chiropractic physician in the State of Florida, having been issued license number CH 000275. Respondent’s fast known address is 801 W. Granada Blvd., #301, Ormond Beach, FL 32174.
  3. From on or about November 14, 1988, through April 20, 1995, Respondent provided chiropractic care for Patient H.O. approximately two hundred and five (205) times.
  4. From on or about March 11. 1993, through December l. 1994, Respondent’s medical records for Patient H.O. revealed documentation of twenty-nine (29) separate Metrecom tests.
  5. Respondent failed to reduce the frequency of tests or adjustments once Maximum Medical Improvement (MMI) was reached on or about December 1990.
  6. The written chiropractic records as maintained by the Respondent do not justify the course of treatment for Patient H.0. because:

a) Respondent’s written records do not justify the extent. frequency, total amount or type of treatment rendered by Respondent;

b) Respondent failed to provide medical documentation justifying the Metrecom testing for Patient H.O from on or about March 11, 1993, through December 1, 1994;

c) Respondent failed to document in the daily notes any information that changed the treatment plan for Patient H.O.;

d) Respondent’s objective findings and assessments for Patient H.O. were substandard.

COUNT I

  1. Petitioner realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs one (1) through six (6) as if fully stated herein.
  2. Based on the foregoing, the Respondent’s license to practice chiropractic in the State of Florida is subject to discipline for violating Section 460.413 (l)(m), Florida Statutes. for failing to keep written chiropractic records justifying the course of treatment of the patient ‘including, but not limited to, patient histories, examination results, test results, X-rays. diagnosis of a disease, condition, or injury.

COUNT II

  1. Petitioner realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs one (1) through six. (6) as if fully stated herein.
  2. Based on the foregoing, the Respondent’s license to practice chiropractic in the State of Florida is subject to discipline for violating Section 460.413 (1) {n), Florida Statutes, for exercising influence on the patient or client in such a manner as to exploit the patient or client for financial gain of the licensee.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Chiropractic enter an order imposing one or more of the following penalties: revocation or suspension of the Respondent’s license, restriction of the Respondent’s practice, imposition of an administrative fine, issuance of a reprimand, placement of the Respondent on probation, and/or any other relief that the Board deems appropriate.

SIGNED this 27th day of October, 1997.

_________________________
James T. Howell. M.D., M.P.H.,
Secretary

BY: Nancy M. Snurkowski
Chief Attorney
Agency for Health Care Administration

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER:

Gregory W. Files
Legal Trainee
Agency for Health Care Administration
Post Office Box 14229
Tallahassee, Florida 32317-4229
(904) 487-2225

Filed: 10-31-97