Zalma on Insurance
Education • Business
Insurance Claims professional presents articles and videos on insurance, insurance Claims and insurance law for insurance Claims adjusters, insurance professionals and insurance lawyers who wish to improve their skills and knowledge. Presented by an internationally recognized expert and author.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
December 17, 2025
Supreme Court of Louisiana Removes Judge

Judge Who Lied to Get Elected Cannot Serve
Post 5245

Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/g7MkYfq5, see the video at https://lnkd.in/g9EbtuUC and at https://lnkd.in/grHpMXUB, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5200 posts.

In In Re: Judge Tiffany Foxworth-Roberts, No. 2025-O-01127, Supreme Court of Louisiana (December 11, 2025) the Louisiana Supreme Court in an opinion by Chief Justice Weimer dealt with the recommendation of the Judiciary Commission of Louisiana (Commission) that Judge Tiffany Foxworth-Roberts be removed from office for:

1. making false and misleading statements regarding her judicial campaigns;
2. making false and misleading statements to police investigating the reported burglary of her car; and
3. withholding information and providing false, incomplete, or misleading information during the investigation by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), as well as in the proceedings before the Commission.

KEY FACTS

Complaint & Investigation:

In May 2021, an anonymous complaint led to an investigation that the judge made false and misleading statements during judicial campaigns about military service — claiming to be a U.S. Army captain and combat veteran of Desert Storm, Iraq, and Afghanistan, when she actually served stateside as a nurse and was honorably discharged as a first lieutenant.

In addition she made false and misleading statements to police regarding a reported car burglary, including misrepresenting the location of the incident and withheld information and provided false, incomplete, or misleading information during the OSC investigation and Commission proceedings.

The Commission found that the statements regarding Respondent's military service were false and misleading in several ways:

1. serve in any capacity during Operation Desert Storm, which took place in 1991, when she was only 16 years old.
2. her claim that she was a veteran of three wars gave the false impression that she served in combat areas overseas. She did not.
3. her claim that she obtained the rank of captain in the Army was also false and misleading.
4. her pattern of misleading information extended to the investigation of the car burglary and subsequent insurance claim.
5. her initial failure to disclose the USAA claim, her misleading statements regarding the location of the burglary, her failure to mention the additional insurance claim, and her contradictory explanations all indicated that she withheld information or provided inaccurate information.

FINDINGS

The Commission found clear and convincing evidence of repeated dishonesty, lack of candor, and attempts to mislead the public, police, insurance company, and the Commission itself.

LEGAL PRINCIPLES & VIOLATIONS

Code of Judicial Conduct Violations:

Violations of Canons 1, 2(A), 7(A)(9), 7(B)(1), and 7(B)(2), which require judges to uphold integrity, avoid impropriety, and be honest in campaign representations.

Louisiana Constitution Article V, § 25(C):

Provides grounds and procedures for judicial discipline, including removal from office for misconduct proven by clear and convincing evidence.

Purpose of Discipline:

The primary goal is to protect the public and preserve the integrity of the judiciary, not merely to punish the judge.

OUTCOME
Removal from Office:

The Supreme Court adopted the Commission’s recommendation, ordering Judge Tiffany Foxworth-Roberts’s removal from office, barring her from qualifying for judicial office for five years, and requiring reimbursement of investigation costs.

SIGNIFICANCE

The court emphasized that honesty and trustworthiness are essential judicial qualities. Persistent dishonesty, especially in campaign representations and official investigations, irreparably damages public confidence in the judiciary and warrants the most severe sanction—removal from office.

Respondent's misconduct constitutes a severe and irreparable impact on the integrity of and respect for the judiciary. Here, Respondent has gone beyond mere misrepresentation that misled the public: she created a campaign sign falsely stating that she was an Army captain, paid for multiple campaign ads that reiterated this untruth, falsely conveyed to voters that she was a combat veteran of three wars, and lied to the police about where the burglary of her car occurred, despite the investigating officer's words inviting clarification.

ORDER

The Supreme Court ruled that Respondent, Judge Tiffany Foxworth-Roberts be immediately suspended and disqualified from exercising any judicial functions.

ZALMA OPINION

Judges whose job is to provide justice to the public must be as clean and pure as Ceasar's wife. To blatantly commit insurance fraud and create a situation of stolen valor claiming to be a combat veteran in multiple areas around the world when she actually served as a nurse in the United States, never achieved a rank greater than lieutenant when she claimed to be a Captain, and lied during the investigation of Judiciary Commission caused the Supreme Court to remover her from office and purged the judiciary of any taint.

(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 InsuranceClaims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk. 

00:09:05
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
September 18, 2026
Expert May Only Testify to What Experience Supports

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...

00:03:10
September 17, 2026
Convicted on 29 Tax-Refund-Fraud Counts

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 ...

00:05:23
September 14, 2026
Court Enforces Fifth Amendment & Refuses to Compel Answers

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 ...

00:05:14
6 hours ago
Convicted of Felony Fraud You Lose the Right to Vote

Payment of Fines & Completion of Probation Reinstates Right to Vote

Post 4576

Posted on November 5, 2026 by Barry Zalma

To Restore Voting Rights The Felon Must Pay Fines of $546.00

In Florida Supreme Court Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee, ETH F-26-377, No. F-26-377 (October 29, 2026) citizen unnamed and to Ron Desantis Governor, Cord Byrd the Secretary of State Florida Division of Elections provided an advisory opinion to a convicted felon about his right to vote:

To: [redacted] We received your request for an advisory opinion. You indicate that you have one or more felony convictions and request whether you are eligible to vote, including whether you have any outstanding legal financial obligations under section 98.0751, Florida Statutes, and, if so, a statement of the amount that must be paid to make you eligible to vote, and an explanation of how the amount was calculated.

The Division hereby responds to your request pursuant to its legal authority under section 106.23(2), Florida Statutes, and Florida ...

November 04, 2026
Castro Valdez Had an Available Administrative Appeal and Failed to Establish a Ground for Excusing

Administrative Review Permits the Agency to Apply its Expertise

Post 4574

In Erwin Jordan Castro Valdez v. Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center, No. 26-cv-06147-BAS-JLB, United States District Court, S.D. California (October 30, 2026) Castro Valdez, a Cuban national paroled into the United States, was arrested on June 23, 2026, for alleged insurance fraud, grand theft, and making a false report to law enforcement. In his first habeas action, the district court ordered a bond hearing within fourteen days to determine whether the changed circumstances justified revoking his parole.

An Immigration Judge subsequently denied bond because of his pending state criminal case. Castro Valdez filed a second petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging that determination and requesting immediate release without first appealing to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

LAW

According to the supplied text, § 2241 does not expressly require administrative exhaustion, but courts impose exhaustion as a prudential requirement. ...

November 03, 2026
Jury Found Prudential to be the Victim of Fraud

Insured’s Ordered to Pay Insurer for Fraud by the Insureds

Post 4573

Posted on November 3, 2026 by Barry Zalma

In The Prudential Insurance Company Of America v. Carol Gardina and George Gardina, No. 6:23-cv-1125-JSS-DCI, United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division (October 22, 2026).

THE JURY TRIAL AND VERDICT

Plaintiff sued Defendants for numerous causes of action stemming from its allegations that Defendants fraudulently collected benefits under their long-term care insurance policies. Plaintiff's case proceeded to a nine-day jury trial, after which the jury found Defendants liable for fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, and civil conspiracy.

The jury also found Defendant Carol Gardina liable to Plaintiff for $1,930,129 in compensatory damages and Defendant George Gardina liable to Plaintiff for $12,496 in compensatory damages and $20 in punitive damages. Thereafter, the court entered judgment in Plaintiff's favor and awarded Plaintiff $1,930,129 in compensatory damages from...

post photo preview
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals