Exemplary Damages Available for Fraud, Malice, or Willful and Wanton Conduct
Post 5039
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/insurer-who-sues-insured-fraud-without-evidence-zalma-esq-cfe-90osc, see the full video at https://rumble.com/v6rlky1-insurer-who-sues-insured-for-fraud-without-evidence-should-be-punished.html and at https://youtu.be/R21dPn2pLSE, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5000 posts.
Lack of Evidence Accusing Insured of Fraud Exposes Insurer to Punitive Damages
In Shalz Construction LLC, a Colorado limited liability company; and Bradley Shalz, individually v. Great Lakes Insurance, SE f/k/a Great Lakes Reinsurance UK PLC, a foreign corporation, Civil Action No. 22-cv-03005-NYW-NRN, United States District Court, D. Colorado (March 31, 2025) the Court was asked by Plaintiffs Shalz Construction, LLC and Bradley Shalz’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “Shalz”) for Leave to Amend to Seek Exemplary Damages (“Motion to Amend”).
Background
The case has a complicated history, originating from third-party claims that Great Lakes asserted against Shalz in an earlier lawsuit involving Pinon Sun ConLack of Evidence Accusing Insured of Fraud Exposes Insurer to Punitive Damages
In Shalz Construction LLC, a Colorado limited liability company; and Bradley Shalz, individually v. Great Lakes Insurance, SE f/k/a Great Lakes Reinsurance UK PLC, a foreign corporation, Civil Action No. 22-cv-03005-NYW-NRN, United States District Court, D. Colorado (March 31, 2025) the Court was asked by Plaintiffs Shalz Construction, LLC and Bradley Shalz’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “Shalz”) for Leave to Amend to Seek Exemplary Damages (“Motion to Amend”).
Background
The case has a complicated history, originating from third-party claims that Great Lakes asserted against Shalz in an earlier lawsuit involving Pinon Sun Condominium Association, Inc. Great Lakes alleged that Shalz conspired with Pinon Sun to commit insurance fraud by submitting inflated estimates for roofing repairs.
Legal Proceedings
Judge Christine M. Arguello dismissed the racketeering claims against Shalz and later entered summary judgment in Shalz’s favor on all remaining claims. The court concluded that Great Lakes had relied on its own contractors’ estimates rather than any information provided by Shalz.
Current Lawsuit
Shalz sued Great Lakes for malicious prosecution, claiming actual out-of-pocket damages of approximately $200,000 and seeking damages for lost profits, business opportunities, and damage to their reputation, estimated at approximately $3 million.
Motion to Amend
Shalz asserted that Great Lakes acted with fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct in bringing the conspiracy and fraud claims against Shalz, justifying a jury awarding exemplary damages.
Legal Standard
Under Colorado law, exemplary damages are appropriate in civil actions where the injury is attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct.
ANALYSIS
Plaintiffs have provided evidence that Great Lakes pursued the lawsuit against Shalz maliciously and with evil intent, primarily to exert settlement pressure. Therefore, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Amend to Seek Exemplary Damages.
Legal Standard For Allowing Exemplary Damages Under Colorado Law
A claim for exemplary damages under Colorado law is appropriate in all civil actions in which damages are assessed by a jury for a wrong done to a person or to personal or real property, where the injury complained of is attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct.
Willful and wanton conduct is defined as conduct purposefully committed which the actor must have realized as dangerous, done heedlessly and recklessly, without regard to consequences, or of the rights and safety of others, particularly the plaintiff.
The statutory requirements are met where the defendant is conscious of his conduct and the existing conditions and knew or should have known that injury would result. Exemplary damages are intended to punish and penalize a defendant for certain wrongful and aggravated conduct and to serve as a warning to other possible offenders
CONCLUSION
Great Lakes brought claims against Shalz for which Great Lakes could not even muster any non-speculative allegations or utterly failed to provide any evidence of, for example, reliance or damages.Plaintiffs brought forward prima facie evidence that Great Lakes sued Shalz for fraud, civil theft with the knowledge that there was little to no support for those claims because Great Lakes had never relied on or been damaged by the alleged conduct.
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Amend to Seek Exemplary Damages was GRANTED.
ZALMA OPINION
Insurance fraud is both a crime and a tort. If an insured commits fraud any claim owed under an insurance policy becomes void and noncollectable. However, accusing an insured of fraud without evidence is wrongful and can take what an insurer thought was a good defense to a claim into an obvious loss and provide the insured with the ability to punish the insurer. Great Lakes learned that its suit against Shalz for fraud and civil theft with the knowledge that there was little to no support for those claims because Great Lakes had never relied on or been damaged by the alleged conduct, the court allowed the plaintiffs to amend their suit to include a claim seeking exemplary damages.
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg
Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
Jury’s Findings Interpreting Insurance Contract Affirmed
Post 5105
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gPa6Vpg8 and at https://lnkd.in/ghgiZNBN, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5100 posts.
Madelaine Chocolate Novelties, Inc. (“Madelaine Chocolate”) appealed the district court’s judgment following a jury verdict in favor of Great Northern Insurance Company (“Great Northern”) concerning storm-surge damage caused by “Superstorm Sandy” to Madelaine Chocolate’s production facilities.
In Madelaine Chocolate Novelties, Inc., d.b.a. The Madelaine Chocolate Company v. Great Northern Insurance Company, No. 23-212, United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit (June 20, 2025) affirmed the trial court ruling in favor of the insurer.
BACKGROUND
Great Northern refused to pay the full claim amount and paid Madelaine Chocolate only about $4 million. In disclaiming coverage, Great Northern invoked the Policy’s flood-exclusion provision, which excludes, in relevant part, “loss or damage caused by ....
Failure to Name a Party as an Additional Insured Defeats Claim
Post 5104
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gbcTYSNa, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/ggmDyTnT and at https://lnkd.in/gZ-uZPh7, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5100 posts.
Contract Interpretation is Based on the Clear and Unambiguous Language of the Policy
In Associated Industries Insurance Company, Inc. v. Sentinel Insurance Company, Ltd., No. 23-CV-10400 (MMG), United States District Court, S.D. New York (June 16, 2025) an insurance coverage dispute arising from a personal injury action in New York State Supreme Court.
The underlying action, Eduardo Molina v. Venchi 2, LLC, et al., concerned injuries allegedly resulting from a construction accident at premises owned by Central Area Equities Associates LLC (CAEA) and leased by Venchi 2 LLC with the USDC required to determine who was entitled to a defense from which insurer.
KEY POINTS
Parties Involved:
CAEA is insured by Associated Industries Insurance Company, Inc. ...
Exclusion Establishes that There is No Duty to Defend Off Site Injuries
Post 5103
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/geje73Gh, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gnQp4X-f and at https://lnkd.in/gPPrB47p, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5100 posts.
Attack by Vicious Dog Excluded
In Foremost Insurance Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan v. Michael B. Steele and Sarah Brown and Kevin Lee Price, Civil Action No. 3:24-CV-00684, United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania (June 16, 2025)
Foremost Insurance Company (“Foremost”) sued Michael B. Steele (“Steele”), Sarah Brown (“Brown”), and Kevin Lee Price (“Price”) (collectively, “Defendants”). Foremost sought declaratory relief in the form of a declaration that
1. it owes no insurance coverage to Steele and has no duty to defend or indemnify Steele in an underlying tort action and
2. defense counsel that Foremost has assigned to Steele in the underlying action may withdraw his appearance.
Presently before the Court are two ...
ZIFL Volume 29, Issue 10
The Source for the Insurance Fraud Professional
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gK_P4-BK and at https://lnkd.in/g2Q7BHBu, and at https://zalma.com/blog and at https://lnkd.in/gjyMWHff.
Zalma’s Insurance Fraud Letter (ZIFL) continues its 29th year of publication dedicated to those involved in reducing the effect of insurance fraud. ZIFL is published 24 times a year by ClaimSchool and is written by Barry Zalma. It is provided FREE to anyone who visits the site at http://zalma.com/zalmas-insurance-fraud-letter-2/ You can read the full issue of the May 15, 2025 issue at http://zalma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/ZIFL-05-15-2025.pdf
This issue contains the following articles about insurance fraud:
Health Care Fraud Trial Results in Murder for Hire of Witness
To Avoid Conviction for Insurance Fraud Defendants Murder Witness
In United States of America v. Louis Age, Jr.; Stanton Guillory; Louis Age, III; Ronald Wilson, Jr., No. 22-30656, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (April 25, 2025) the Fifth Circuit dealt with the ...
Professional Health Care Services Exclusion Effective
Post 5073
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/g-f6Tjm5 and at https://lnkd.in/gx3agRzi, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5050 posts.
This opinion is the recommendation of a Magistrate Judge to the District Court Judge and involves Travelers Casualty Insurance Company and its duty to defend the New Mexico Bone and Joint Institute (NMBJI) and its physicians in a medical negligence lawsuit brought by Tervon Dorsey.
In Travelers Casualty Insurance Company Of America v. New Mexico Bone And Joint Institute, P.C.; American Foundation Of Lower Extremity Surgery And Research, Inc., a New Mexico Corporation; Riley Rampton, DPM; Loren K. Spencer, DPM; Tervon Dorsey, individually; Kimberly Dorsey, individually; and Kate Ferlic as Guardian Ad Litem for K.D. and J.D., minors, No. 2:24-cv-0027 MV/DLM, United States District Court, D. New Mexico (May 8, 2025) the Magistrate Judge Recommended:
Insurance Coverage Dispute:
Travelers issued a Commercial General Liability ...
A Heads I Win, Tails You Lose Story
Post 5062
Posted on April 30, 2025 by Barry Zalma
"This is a Fictionalized True Crime Story of Insurance Fraud that explains why Insurance Fraud is a “Heads I Win, Tails You Lose” situation for Insurers. The story is designed to help everyone 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."
Immigrant Criminals Attempt to Profit From Insurance Fraud
People who commit insurance fraud as a profession do so because it is easy. It requires no capital investment. The risk is low and the profits are high. The ease with which large amounts of money can be made from insurance fraud removes whatever moral hesitation might stop the perpetrator from committing the crime.
The temptation to do everything outside the law was the downfall of the brothers Karamazov. The brothers had escaped prison in the old Soviet Union by immigrating to the United...
