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
Happy Law Day
ZIFL – Volume 30, Issue 9 – May 1, 2026
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/zalmas-insurance-fraud-letter-may-1-2026-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-2tywc, see the video at at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
THE SOURCE FOR THE INSURANCE FRAUD PROFESSIONAL
ZIFL – Volume 30, Issue 9 – May 1, 2026
Zalma’s Insurance Fraud Letter (ZIFL) continues its 30th year of publication dedicated to those involved in reducing the effect of insurance fraud. ZIFL is published 24 times a year and is written by Barry Zalma.
DOJ Creates National Fraud Enforcement Division
Will the Feds Take on Insurance Fraud? Possibly as Part of a National Anti-Fraud Effort
On April 7, 2026, the Acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, issued a memorandum establishing the Department of Justice National Fraud Enforcement Division (NFED). The memo describes an ambitious, but perhaps redundant, vision for this ...
When Abalone Died As a Result of Multiple Causes The Efficient Proximate Cause Requires Payment
Post number 5345
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/efficient-proximate-cause-doctrine-saves-claim-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-yndlc, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
In American Abalone Farms, LLC v. Star Insurance Company et al., H052643, California Court of Appeals, Sixth District (April 27, 2026) the Court of Appeals dealt with an insurance coverage issue that required application of the efficient proximate cause doctrine.
FACTS
American Abalone Farms, LLC ("American Abalone" ) operates an aquaculture farm in Santa Cruz County, California, raising abalone in tanks. In August 2020, the CZU Lightning Complex Fires led to a prolonged power outage and road closures near the farm. As a result, the farm’s water pumps failed, causing the death of most of the ...
Breach of a Specific Condition Precedent Is a Complete Defense
See the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
In United Services Automobile Association and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Anthony Wenzell, 2026 CO 25 (Colo. Apr. 27, 2026) Anthony Wenzell was rear-ended in a car accident. He had a significant prior 2014 accident that required back surgery.
Wenzell claimed underinsured-motorist (UIM) benefits under three policies: (1) the tortfeasor’s liability policy, (2) his own primary UIM policy with State Farm, and (3) an excess UIM policy issued by USAA (under his brother’s policy, which contained an “other insurance” clause making USAA’s coverage excess over any collectible insurance).
After receiving the claims, both USAA and State Farm repeatedly requested that Wenzell execute comprehensive medical-release authorizations so they could obtain his full medical records and ...
It is Fraud to Make the Same Claim Twice
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fraud-make-same-claim-twice-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-c4g8c and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Chutzpah: After Being Paid for a New Roof Insured Makes Second Claim For Same Damages
Post number 5347
No One is Entitled to be Paid for the Same Loss Twice
In Mohammed Ali Khalili v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 14-25-00611-CV, Court of Appeals of Texas (April 30, 2026) Khalili maintained a State Farm Lloyds homeowners insurance policy for decades. In 2008 he filed a roof-damage claim; State Farm paid him to replace the entire roof (shingles and gutters). Khalili never replaced the roof and repeated his claim.
BACKGROUND
In 2021 he filed a second roof claim. State Farm’s inspectors found the roof “very old” with extensive non-storm-related damage. The claim was denied because (1) the damage did not exceed the deductible and (2) State Farm had already paid for a full roof replacement.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
State Farm filed motion for summary...
It is Fraud to Make the Same Claim Twice
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fraud-make-same-claim-twice-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-c4g8c and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Chutzpah: After Being Paid for a New Roof Insured Makes Second Claim For Same Damages
Post number 5347
No One is Entitled to be Paid for the Same Loss Twice
In Mohammed Ali Khalili v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 14-25-00611-CV, Court of Appeals of Texas (April 30, 2026) Khalili maintained a State Farm Lloyds homeowners insurance policy for decades. In 2008 he filed a roof-damage claim; State Farm paid him to replace the entire roof (shingles and gutters). Khalili never replaced the roof and repeated his claim.
BACKGROUND
In 2021 he filed a second roof claim. State Farm’s inspectors found the roof “very old” with extensive non-storm-related damage. The claim was denied because (1) the damage did not exceed the deductible and (2) State Farm had already paid for a full roof replacement.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
State Farm filed motion for summary...
What Must be Done after Notice of a Claim is Received by the Insurer
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gzvvdkMZ and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Below you will read from this post until you reach the the end of this blog post as the free part of an Excellence in Claims Handling post. To read the full article and receive all articles for members of Excellence in Claims Handling you should consider joining as a paid member to get full access to articles for members only, to our news, analysis, insurance coverage, claims, insurance fraud and insurance webinars, by clicking at the subscription link below.
A first party property policy does not insure property: it insures a person, partnership, corporation or other entity against the risk of loss of the property. Before an insured can make a claim for indemnity under a policy of first party property insurance the insured must prove that there was damage to property the risk of loss of which was insured by the policy. The obligation imposed on the insured ...
