Insured’s Suit for Fire Insurance Benefits Defeated by Qui Tam Claim by Insurer
Barry Zalma
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gNcnaDuW and see the full video at https://lnkd.in/g2c3ZcPj and at https://lnkd.in/gWWhYW2g and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4300 posts.
In Lisa A. McCullough v. Metlife Auto & Home, No. 4:20-CV-01807, United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania (September 30, 2022) McCullough sued seeking to force MetLife to pay Plaintiff for an insurance policy on the McCullough’s home, which was destroyed in a fire in 2019.
BACKGROUND
MetLife moved the case to the USDC and filed an answer to complaint, along with a counterclaim against Plaintiff for insurance fraud. MetLife served the counterclaim on Plaintiff’s attorney that same month, alleging insurance fraud under Pennsylvania law. Plaintiff failed to respond to the counterclaim. In March 2021, MetLife moved for entry of default against Plaintiff, and default was subsequently entered by the Clerk of Court.
MetLife moved for a default judgment. In January 2022, this Court granted MetLife’s motion and requested briefing and evidence of any damages sought by MetLife. MetLife has submitted a brief and evidence listing its damages. MetLife has additionally moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). For the following reasons, MetLife’s Rule 12(c) motion will be granted and its motion for a default judgment will be granted in part and denied in part.
DISCUSSION
When considering a motion for judgment on the pleadings a court assumes the truth of all factual allegations in the plaintiff’s complaint and draws all inferences in favor of that party. It does not, however, assume the truth of any of the complaint’s legal conclusions
Pennsylvania law provides that an individual commits the offense of insurance fraud if she “[k]nowingly and with the intent to defraud any insurer or self-insured, presents or causes to be presented to any insurer or self-insured any statement forming a part of, or in support of, a claim that contains any false, incomplete or misleading information concerning any fact or thing material to the claim.”
Although these elements are set forth in a criminal statute, the statute further allows aggrieved insurers to file a civil action against violators of the statute “to recover compensatory damages, which may include reasonable investigation expenses, costs of suit and attorney fees.”
Additional facts indicated that Plaintiff set the fire, such as her relocation of important documents before the fire and the discovery of newly purchased gas cans with residual gasoline in them at her home, after the fire. Plaintiff “submitted a claim to Defendant for the alleged loss as a result of the fire,” thereby presenting “false, incomplete and/or misleading information concerning the claim and the cause of the fire.”
As Plaintiff did not appear before the Court, the Court, by rule of practice, must conclude that there are no disputed material facts. MetLife’s factual allegations lead to a reasonable inference that Plaintiff committed insurance fraud. Accordingly, MetLife’s motion under Rule 12(c) was granted.
MetLife’s Damages
Having found that MetLife satisfactorily alleged a civil claim for insurance fraud, the Court then considered its damages. MetLife sought $26,069.01 in “pre-suit investigation costs.” It has provided the Court with invoices for the firms hired to investigate the fire in McCullough’s home to support its request for pre-suit costs. The Court found this evidence sufficient to award the pre-suit costs without an evidentiary hearing.
MetLife also sought “$29,998.04 in litigation costs of suit and attorney fees” for a total of $56,067.05.
The invoices MetLife submitted did not indicate if multiple attorneys worked on this matter or only William J. McPartland, Esq. Additionally, the invoices did not explain how many hours were billed for or the hourly rates for Mr. McPartland and any other attorneys working on the matter. Nor are there affidavits to substantiate those hourly rates as the prevailing market rates in the community. Without this information, the Court could not determine a reasonable fee for counsel’s efforts.
Accordingly, MetLife’s motion for a default judgment was granted in part and denied in part with respect to the damages it sought and the court offered to reconsider if provided sufficient detail concerning the attorneys fees sought.
ZALMA OPINION
Insurance fraud, especially an arson for profit, are both crimes and defenses to breach of contract claims by the insured arsonist. When Met Life filed its cross-claim the insured and her counsel saw the writing on the wall and refused to participate. As a result the insurer obtained a judgment against the insured which may or may not be collectible. The judge, with a finding of fraud, should have referred the case to the local U.S. Attorney for prosecution.
(c) 2022 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to service as an insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance claims handling, insurance bad faith and insurance fraud almost equally for insurers and policyholders. He practiced law in California for more than 44 years as an insurance coverage and claims handling lawyer and more than 54 years in the insurance business. He is available at http://www.zalma.com and [email protected] and receive videos limited to subscribers of Excellence in Claims Handling at locals.com https://zalmaoninsurance.locals.com/subscribe.Subscribe to Excellence in Claims Handling at https://barryzalma.substack.com/welcome.
Now available Barry Zalma’s newest book, The Tort of Bad Faith, available here. The new book is available as a Kindle book, a paperback or as a hard cover.
Write to Mr. Zalma at [email protected]; http://www.zalma.com; http://zalma.com/blog; daily articles are published at
Zalma on Insurance
Insurance, insurance claims, insurance law, and insurance fraud .
By Barry Zalma.
Go to the podcast Zalma On Insurance at https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma; Follow Mr. Zalma on Twitter at https://twitter.com/bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/c-262921; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library
The Largest Residential Burglary of All Time
Post 5407
Fraud & the Fear of Bad Faith Suits
Posted on July 22, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gWQQEySW and at https://lnkd.in/gyhdK6wv
This is a Fictionalized True Crime Story of Insurance Fraud explaining why Insurance Fraud is a “Heads I Win, Tails You Lose” situation for Insurers. The story is one of a collection designed to help to Understand How Insurance Fraud in America is Costing Everyone who Buys Insurance Thousands of Dollars Every year and Why Insurance Fraud is Safer and More Profitable for the Perpetrators than any Other Crime.
This is a Fictionalized True Crime Story of Insurance Fraud explaining why Insurance Fraud is a “Heads I Win, Tails You Lose” situation for Insurers. The story is one of a collection designed to help to Understand How Insurance Fraud in America is Costing Everyone who Buys Insurance Thousands of Dollars Every year and Why Insurance Fraud is Safer and More Profitable for the Perpetrators than any Other Crime.
After ...
Chutzpah is not Enough
Post 5397
Posted on July 20, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the video and at https://lnkd.in/gNUs2XzT and at https://lnkd.in/g2MawyzX
Magistrate Issues a Search Warrant if there is a Fair Probability that Contraband or Evidence of a Crime will be Found in a Particular Place.
In United States Of America v. Frank Suess, et al., CRIMINAL No. 3:24-308, United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania (July 16, 2026) a federal grand jury indicted Frank Suess, Melissa Driscoll, and others in a 55-count health care fraud and anti-kickback prosecution arising from an alleged scheme involving medically unnecessary prescription “foot baths.”
As part of the investigation, the FBI obtained an August 19, 2022 warrant to search Driscoll’s Sterling Pharmacy Yahoo email account for emails from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2020. Driscoll moved to suppress the resulting evidence, arguing that the warrant lacked probable cause, was overbroad, and rested on material misstatements and omissions.
LAW:
The ...
Fraud Shouldn’t Pay
Post 5396
See the video and at https://rumble.com/v7ctgmq-the-great-jewel-theft.html at https://youtu.be/aRbQ2sJfGwA
This is a Fictionalized True Crime Story of Insurance Fraud explaining why Insurance Fraud is a “Heads I Win, Tails You Lose” situation for Insurers. The story is one of a collection designed to help to Understand How Insurance Fraud in America is Costing Everyone who Buys Insurance Thousands of Dollars Every year and Why Insurance Fraud is Safer and More Profitable for the ¬¬¬Perpetrators than any Other Crime.
The Insured purchased, for the first time in his life, a policy of Personal Articles Floater Insurance (PAF) scheduling $125,000 worth of ladies jewelry. He advised the insurer that the jewelry was always kept in a class E safe at his residence. He also told the insurer that he was employed full time as the owner of a gasoline service station and that he had never been canceled or suffered a previous loss.
One month after the policy was ...
Day Care Owner Loses Subsidies Because She Criticized State
Post 5421
Posted on August 11, 2026 by Barry Zalma
First Amendment Right Will be Allowed to Go to Trial
In Betsey J. Grant v. Maine State Department Of Heath And Human Services, No. 1:25-cv-00490-JAW, United States District Court, D. Maine (August 6, 2026), Betsey J. Grant, a licensed childcare provider and operator of Tiny Tikes Daycare in Trenton, Maine, sued Maine DHHS and several employees after she publicly criticized DHHS before Maine’s Government Oversight Committee and alleged that officials retaliated against her.
She claimed DHHS imposed and extended a conditional license, published stigmatizing information, interfered with subsidies and program funding, removed her from a food program, rescinded an expansion grant, and used biased or falsified evidence in licensing proceedings. Following the March 10, 2023, GOC testimony, Ms. Grant alleges that foster children's subsidies (approximately $30,000) were withheld; she was removed from the ...
Rescission for Material Misrepresentation
Post 5418
Posted on August 5, 2026 by Barry Zalma
An Insurer May Rescind An Insurance Policy Where The Applicant Made A Material Misrepresentation In The Application.
In Union Mutual Fire Insurance Company v. 844 Knickerbocker, LLC, et al. No. 2024-10359, Index No. 602824/22, 2026 NY Slip Op 04789, Supreme Court of New York, Second Department (July 29, 2026) Union Mutual Fire Insurance Company issued commercial insurance policies to 844 Knickerbocker, LLC, and Sanjaya Mallick based on applications stating that the insured property contained two apartment units. After an underlying personal injury action was filed, Union Mutual determined that the property actually contained three apartment units and rescinded the policies on the ground that the defendants had made a material misrepresentation in the applications.
LAW:
A misrepresentation is material if the insurer would not have issued the same policy, or would have issued it only on different terms, had the true ...
Rescission for Material Misrepresentation
Post 5418
Posted on August 5, 2026 by Barry Zalma
An Insurer May Rescind An Insurance Policy Where The Applicant Made A Material Misrepresentation In The Application.
In Union Mutual Fire Insurance Company v. 844 Knickerbocker, LLC, et al. No. 2024-10359, Index No. 602824/22, 2026 NY Slip Op 04789, Supreme Court of New York, Second Department (July 29, 2026) Union Mutual Fire Insurance Company issued commercial insurance policies to 844 Knickerbocker, LLC, and Sanjaya Mallick based on applications stating that the insured property contained two apartment units.
LAW:
A misrepresentation is material if the insurer would not have issued the same policy, or would have issued it only on different terms, had the true facts been disclosed. To establish materiality as a matter of law, the insurer must submit documentation of its underwriting practices, such as manuals, guidelines, bulletins, or rules addressing similar risks.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
As a result, the...
