See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gB5EKA9t and at https://lnkd.in/gBpMe7V2, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5100 posts.
Workers’ Compensation Insurer Sues to Collect Premiums Avoided by Fraud
It’s Fraud to Lie on Application for Insurance
Post 5121
In The Commissioners Of The State Insurance Fund v. Capcon Construction Industries Corp., Capcon Construction Supply Corp., Jab Masonry Corp., Agra Masonry Inc., Agra Industries Usa Corp, A&A Masonry Corp., Alexander Shvartsberg, Darren Caputo, Maryann Furman, 2025 NY Slip Op 32359(U), Index No. 452680/2024, Motion Seq. No. 002, Supreme Court, New York County (July 2, 2025) the court dealt with a fraudulent application for workers’ compensation insurance.
BACKGROUND
On March 3, 2015, A&A Masonry Corp. applied for workers’ compensation insurance coverage from the New York State Insurance Fund (SIF).
On January 15, 2016, Agra Masonry Inc. was incorporated with Maryann Furman as the sole shareholder and President.
On January 4, 2018, SIF canceled the A&A Policy for non-payment.
On March 6, 2018, Masonry applied for workers’ compensation and employer’s liability insurance from SIF.
On November 29, 2018, SIF commenced an action against A&A seeking to recover unpaid insurance premiums.
On October 3, 2019, SIF sent Masonry a notice of cancellation.
On October 9, 2019, the Masonry Policy was reinstated after Masonry paid $6,286.47.
On February 21, 2019, SIF obtained a judgment against A&A for $333,301.65.
On June 30, 2020, Agra Industries USA Corp. was incorporated.
On October 27, 2021, SIF commenced an action against Masonry seeking recovery of unpaid insurance premiums.
On January 12, 2022, SIF obtained a judgment against Masonry in the amount of $5,398,564.69.
On September 27, 2024, SIF commenced the instant action seeking $15,521,316.45 in damages.
DISCUSSION
Insurance Fraud WCL §§ 96(2) And 93
Pursuant to WCL § 96(1), any “person who knowingly … conceals any material fact or engages in any other fraudulent scheme or device for the purpose of obtaining, maintaining or renewing insurance in the state insurance fund … shall be guilty of a class E felony.” Violations of WCL § 96(1) entitle SIF to treble damages, “or five thousand dollars, whichever is greater.” WCL § 96(2).
Here, plaintiff has provided documentary evidence and pled with sufficient particularity that Shvartsberg’s role at Masonry was omitted on the Masonry Application’s question six for the purpose of obtaining insurance, as Shvartsberg was barred from obtaining policies from the SIF Fund due to the A&A judgment under WCL § 93. Thus, defendant’s motion to dismiss the sixth cause of action should be denied.
CONCLUSIONS
Alter Ego Liability: Plaintiff has presented evidence that Masonry’s funds were diverted to make it judgment-proof.
1. Successor Liability: Plaintiff has sufficiently pled that Industries could be liable for the Masonry Judgment as the successor of Masonry.
2. DCL §273: Plaintiff has pled a voidable transfer pursuant to DCL § 273(a)(1).
3. DCL § 274: Plaintiff has alleged that Masonry’s judgment rendered it insolvent.
4. Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to DCL § 276-a: Plaintiff has sufficiently pled the prior DCL causes of action.
5. Insurance Fraud WCL §§ 96(2) and 93: Plaintiff has provided documentary evidence and pled with sufficient particularity that Shvartsberg’s role at Masonry was omitted on the Masonry Application.
ZALMA OPINION
Insurance fraud is a crime in almost every state, including the state of New York. Lying about the management of a company to hide the fact it is controlled by a person who was ineligible for insurance voids the insurance and can be criminal and, at the least, will void the insurance and holds the owners responsible for the premium charged to the various entities. Hiding behind new corporate entities to avoid premium payments is fraud in the inducement the insurer to rescind and obtain a judgment for earned premium.
(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 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.
Insurance Expert May Not Testify to Speculative and Contains Unsupported Conclusions.
Posted on September 18, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the full video at and at https://rumble.com/v7fmifw-expert-may-only-testify-to-what-experience-supports.html
In Michele A. Over, and The Estate Of Paul R. Over v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, and State Farm Fire And Casualty Company, Civil Action No. 23-cv-02243-PAB-STV, United States District Court, D. Colorado (September 14, 2026) Michele and Paul Over sued State Farm Fire and State Farm Auto over hail-damage and stolen-vehicle claims.
The operative dispute concerned State Farm Auto’s motion to exclude or limit opinions from plaintiffs’ insurance-industry expert, Aaron Castillo. Castillo.
Law
The proponent of expert testimony must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that an expert is qualified and that the opinions are helpful, sufficiently grounded, and reliably derived and applied. Experience-based opinions must explain how the...
150 Months in Prison for Tax Fraud
Post 4846
Posted on September 17, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/g8rh3JBX and https://lnkd.in/gmkdy-9C, In United States Of America v. Thomas Addaquay, Nos. 25-10609, 25-10611, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit (September 9, 2026) the Eleventh Circuit affirmed all challenged convictions, the 150-month aggregate sentence, and the challenged $4,123,474.55 restitution award.
FACTS
In United States Of America v. Thomas Addaquay, United States Of America v. Thomas Addaquay, Nos. 25-10609, 25-10611, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit (September 9, 2026) the Eleventh Circuit affirmed all challenged convictions, the 150-month aggregate sentence, and the challenged $4,123,474.55 restitution award.
FACTS
Thomas Addaquay controlled United Consolidated Accounting and Business Services (UC), nominally a check-cashing business.
The government proved a three-stage tax-refund scheme that converted the resulting refund checks into usable funds through ...
Major Fraud Perpetrator Asserts Fifth Amendment Privilege to Avoid Prosecution
Post 5489
Posted on September 14, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Fraudster Refuses to Answer Questions About His Alleged Fraud
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gvicAMDr and at https://lnkd.in/gvicAMDr
In Great American Insurance Co. v. Gemstone Property Management, LLC, et al., No. 23-cv-9100 (LJL), United States District Court, S.D. New York (September 8, 2026) Great American Insurance Company alleged that it was defrauded through a scheme in which Subin Associates, LLP recruited individuals to stage construction-site injuries, arranged unnecessary medical treatment and litigation funding, and pursued fraudulent personal-injury claims.
Luis Manuel Garcia Salcedo, resulted in a $6 million settlement. Non-party Jose Hernandez allegedly worked as an assistant manager at Subin, operated Hernandez Associates, and owned litigation-funding companies that shared office space with Subin and provided services to its clients.
After Great American ...
Claims of Res Judicata and Procedural Default Defeats Habeas
Post 5543
Posted on November 13, 2026 by Barry Zalma
A Health Insurance Fraud Conviction Rested On Knowingly Submitting Materially False Or Misleading Claim Information With Specific Intent To Defraud.
A Health Insurance Fraud Conviction Rested On Knowingly Submitting Materially False Or Misleading Claim Information With Specific Intent To Defraud.
In Tariq Mustafa Abdulaziz v. Commissioner Of Correction, No. CV 26-5002432-S, Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Tolland, Habeas Docket (October 29, 2026) Tariq Mustafa Abdulaziz submitted 114 claims for in-home, face-to-face services purportedly provided to thirty program participants during four one-week periods. The department paid Neurostrategies, Inc., $13,650.
FACTS
The defendant waived his right to a jury trial and elected a trial to the court, D'Addabbo, J. Trial occurred over the course of eight days in August, 2022. The state presented testimony from ten witnesses and introduced thirty-three exhibits into ...
Theft of Confidential Information
Post 4581
Posted on November 12, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In People Center, Inc. v. Deel, Inc., et al., No. 25-cv-02576-CRB (LJC), United States District Court, N.D. California (November 7, 2026) People Center, doing business as Rippling, and Deel compete in payroll and human-resource management software. Rippling alleges that Deel and its executives recruited Rippling employee Keith O’Brien, based in Ireland, to disclose confidential information and trade secrets.
THE IRISH SUIT
Rippling sued O’Brien in Ireland and Deel in the United States. O’Brien subsequently retained separate counsel, supplied an affidavit describing the alleged espionage, and entered into a Cooperation Agreement with Rippling. In exchange for his cooperation, Rippling agreed to provide financial assistance, indemnification, and conditional dismissal of the Irish proceedings. The agreement also permitted renewed proceedings or a monetary judgment upon a material breach.
The Irish proceedings against O’Brien were dismissed...
A Proposed Amended Complaint That Includes New Factual Allegations to Remedy Pleading Deficiencies
Posted on November 11, 2026 by Barry Zalma
After Dismissal Fraud Victim May Amend Complaint After Dismissal
Post 4580
If A Proposed Amendment Is Not Clearly Futile, Then Denial Of Leave To Amend Is Improper
In John Hancock Life & Health Insurance Company v. Caring Connections LLC, Arthur Feldheim, and Blime a/k/a Vera Feldheim, Civ. No. 25-7574 (MAS)(JBD), United States District Court, D. New Jersey (November 6, 2026) John Hancock sued Caring Connections LLC, Arthur Feldheim, and Blime a/k/a Vera Feldheim on June 5, 2025, asserting thirteen claims, including fraud, breach of contract, and aiding and abetting fraud.
On March 26, 2026, this Court entered an order granting Caring Connections’ motion to dismiss and granting in part and denying in part the Feldheims’ motion to dismiss. The dismissed claims were dismissed without prejudice, and John Hancock timely sought leave to amend.
They also argued that the New ...
