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
Insured Must Give Prompt Notice of Loss
Post 5256
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gBXRbKXD, see the video at https://lnkd.in/g4DKfUDz and at https://lnkd.in/g65V_RQ7 and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
Once The Insured Knows There is Damage It is Obligated to Report the Loss to the Insurer
In Greater St. Stephen Ministries, Inc. v. Mt. Hawley Insurance Company, No. 24-cv-3130 (AS), United States District Court, S.D. New York (January 2, 2026) resolved a case brought by a church against an insurance company for denying coverage after Hurricane Ida. After discovery, the insurance company moved for summary judgment because it claimed the insured breached a material condition of the policy.
BACKGROUND
Greater St. Stephen Ministries, Inc., a church located in Louisiana, owned property that suffered damage from Hurricane Ida on August 29, 2021. The property was insured under a policy with Mt. Hawley Insurance Company, which required the insured to provide “prompt notice” of any loss or damage, ...
Insured Must Give Prompt Notice of Loss
Post 5256
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gBXRbKXD, see the video at https://lnkd.in/g4DKfUDz and at https://lnkd.in/g65V_RQ7 and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
Once The Insured Knows There is Damage It is Obligated to Report the Loss to the Insurer
In Greater St. Stephen Ministries, Inc. v. Mt. Hawley Insurance Company, No. 24-cv-3130 (AS), United States District Court, S.D. New York (January 2, 2026) resolved a case brought by a church against an insurance company for denying coverage after Hurricane Ida. After discovery, the insurance company moved for summary judgment because it claimed the insured breached a material condition of the policy.
BACKGROUND
Greater St. Stephen Ministries, Inc., a church located in Louisiana, owned property that suffered damage from Hurricane Ida on August 29, 2021. The property was insured under a policy with Mt. Hawley Insurance Company, which required the insured to provide “prompt notice” of any loss or damage, ...
New Trial Because Jury Used Policy That Provides No Coverage to Assess Damages
Post 5255
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/drG3xH2R, see the video at https://lnkd.in/d6p8e-9p and at https://lnkd.in/dgPsQ3Sn, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
In Brown & Brown of Florida, Inc. v. Houligan’s Pub & Club, Inc., and Ormond Wine Company, LLC, Nos. 5D2024-2352, 5D2024-2458, Florida Court of Appeals (January 2, 2026) the Court of Appeals was faced with a case of first impression that involved damages from a hurricane that hit the East Coast of Florida almost a decade ago and the extent to which an insurance broker is responsible for paying for such damages.
The jury entered a verdict in favor of the insurance broker on the insured’s claim that it was negligent in failing to procure insurance, but it found in favor of the insured on claims of breach of fiduciary duty and negligent misrepresentation.
The insurance broker does not contest it breached its duties on these two claims, only ...
Court Must Follow Judicial Precedent
Post 5252
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sudden-opposite-gradual-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-h7qmc, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
Insurance Policy Interpretation Requires Application of the Judicial Construction Doctrine
In Montrose Chemical Corporation Of California v. The Superior Court Of Los Angeles County, Canadian Universal Insurance Company, Inc., et al., B335073, Court of Appeal, 337 Cal.Rptr.3d 222 (9/30/2025) the Court of Appeal refused to allow extrinsic evidence to interpret the word “sudden” in qualified pollution exclusions (QPEs) as including gradual but unexpected pollution. The court held that, under controlling California appellate precedent, the term “sudden” in these standard-form exclusions unambiguously includes a temporal element (abruptness) and cannot reasonably be construed to mean ...
Lack of Jurisdiction Defeats Suit for Defamation
Post 5250
Posted on December 29, 2025 by Barry Zalma
See the video at and at
He Who Represents Himself in a Lawsuit has a Fool for a Client
In Pankaj Merchia v. United Healthcare Services, Inc., Civil Action No. 24-2700 (RC), United States District Court, District of Columbia (December 22, 2025)
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Parties & Claims:
The plaintiff, Pankaj Merchia, is a physician, scientist, engineer, and entrepreneur, proceeding pro se. Merchia sued United Healthcare Services, Inc., a Minnesota-based medical insurance company, for defamation and related claims. The core allegation is that United Healthcare falsely accused Merchia of healthcare fraud, which led to his indictment and arrest in Massachusetts, causing reputational and business harm in the District of Columbia and nationwide.
Underlying Events:
The alleged defamation occurred when United ...
Zalma’s Insurance Fraud Letter
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/dG829BF6; see the video at https://lnkd.in/dyCggZMZ and at https://lnkd.in/d6a9QdDd.
ZIFL Volume 29, Issue 24
Subscribe to the e-mail Version of ZIFL, it’s Free! https://visitor.r20.constantcontact.com/manage/optin?v=001Gb86hroKqEYVdo-PWnMUkcitKvwMc3HNWiyrn6jw8ERzpnmgU_oNjTrm1U1YGZ7_ay4AZ7_mCLQBKsXokYWFyD_Xo_zMFYUMovVTCgTAs7liC1eR4LsDBrk2zBNDMBPp7Bq0VeAA-SNvk6xgrgl8dNR0BjCMTm_gE7bAycDEHwRXFAoyVjSABkXPPaG2Jb3SEvkeZXRXPDs%3D
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/
Zalma’s Insurance Fraud Letter
Merry Christmas & Happy Hannukah
Read the following Articles from the December 15, 2025 issue:
Read the full 19 page issue of ZIFL at ...
