Seeking injunctive relief to stop parallel arbitrations while a fraud claim is pending is considered a drastic remedy.

The plaintiffs filed suit against the defendants, seeking reimbursement of paid bills allegedly submitted through fraudulent no-fault insurance charges. The plaintiffs sought injunctive relief to stay parallel PIP collection arbitrations filed by the defendants from occurring until the fraud suit was resolved. The court found that, while “possibly inconvenient,” the plaintiffs will still be able to recoup any awarded benefits if they prevailed in their fraud claims and could continue to defend the arbitrations cases by asserting that medical treatment given to specific patients was not medically necessary. Accordingly, seeking injunctive relief to stop parallel arbitrations while a fraud claim is pending is considered a drastic remedy, and a showing of irreparable harm and a likelihood of success on the merits are key perquisites to establish.

Case Law Alerts, 4^th Quarter, October 2020 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2020 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.