Swoop & Squat Fails
Posted on July 16, 2026 by Barry Zalma
The Only Solution to Fraud is to Take the Profit Out of the Crime
It Takes Courage to Fight the Fraudster
Post number 5395
In Vivian Maritza Triana Marin, Sebastian Arroyave Penagos, and Daniel Arroyave Penagos v. Marc J. Paynter and Transport Marc Paynter Inc., No. 23-CV-6498, United States District Court, E.D. New York (July 10, 2026) Plaintiffs sued Defendants in diversity after a rear-end collision on the Whitestone Expressway in Queens, New York. Plaintiffs were in a Subaru driven by Vivian Maritza Triana Marin, while Defendant Marc J. Paynter drove a Transport Marc Paynter Inc. tractor-trailer.
Facts:
Dashcam footage from Defendants’ vehicle showed Plaintiffs’ vehicle braking suddenly in the left lane despite an open roadway ahead. Marin could not identify a specific reason for braking, the passenger plaintiffs did not know why she braked, and a non-party witness testified that Plaintiffs’ vehicle stopped abruptly for no apparent reason.
The Accident occurred when Defendants’ vehicle contacted the rear bumper of Plaintiffs’ vehicle. Marin testified that she was traveling at the posted speed limit of fifty-five miles per hour prior to the Accident, and that she decelerated by removing her foot from the accelerator prior to impact. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants’ vehicle was “overtaking cars on the right while remaining in the left lane. Defendants acknowledge that Defendants’ vehicle was in the left lane but contend that the Video shows that other vehicles were passing Defendants’ vehicle on the right.
On March 21, 2024, Plaintiffs’ no-fault insurance carrier, LM General Insurance Company, also known as “Liberty Mutual,” filed an action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Nassau County, against Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ healthcare providers, seeking a declaratory judgment that the Accident was “not the product of a covered event as it was the product of staged and/or intentional event,” which was “perpetrated by [Plaintiffs] with the intent to obtain insurance benefits that [Plaintiffs] would not otherwise be entitled to receive.”
The prior no-fault litigation and arbitration proceedings involved allegations that the accident was staged, even though Plaintiffs were discontinued from the state action without prejudice and were not parties to the arbitrations.
LAW:
Summary judgment is proper where there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Reliable video evidence may control over a party’s contrary version of events when the recording blatantly contradicts that version. For fraud under New York law, Defendants had to establish material misrepresentation or omission, knowledge of falsity, intent to induce reliance, justifiable reliance, and damages by clear and convincing evidence.
DISCUSSION:
The court found the dashcam video dispositive on liability.
It showed Defendants’ tractor-trailer maintaining a steady and safe distance for approximately thirty-five seconds before Plaintiffs’ vehicle suddenly braked with no vehicle, obstruction, pothole, construction, or other hazard ahead.
Plaintiffs’ explanations were speculative, while the video and witness testimony supported Defendants’ position that the unexplained stop caused the accident. The court rejected Plaintiffs’ arguments that Defendants failed to maintain a safe distance or improperly used the left lane, finding no causal violation sufficient to impose liability on Defendants.
ANALYSIS:
Because the undisputed video evidence eliminated any reasonable inference that Defendants caused the collision, the court held that Plaintiffs’ vehicle was the sole proximate cause of the accident.
Liability was resolved in Defendants’ favor and made it unnecessary to address Defendants’ alternative argument that Plaintiffs failed to satisfy New York’s serious-injury threshold. However, the fraud counterclaim survived because the prior state action and no-fault arbitration decisions had no preclusive effect against Plaintiffs, and Defendants did not adequately establish each fraud element on summary judgment.
CONCLUSION:
Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on liability was denied. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on liability was granted.
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the fraud counterclaim was denied, leaving that counterclaim for trial.
ZALMA OPINION
The swoop and squat is a type of insurance fraud where the driver of the fraudster’s car stops suddenly in front of an 18 Wheeler assuming it is insured and then making fake bodily injury claims. Plaintiffs sued Defendants in diversity after a rear-end collision on the Whitestone Expressway in Queens, New York. Plaintiffs attempted fraud by stopping in the middle of a highway in front of Marc J. Paynter’stractor-trailer. He fought and counterclaimed for damages. The trial will decide if Paynter can prove the fraud and get damages from the criminals.
(c) 2026 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://gbarryzalma.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://Cwww.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the InsuranceClaims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk.
To Prove Fraud Material False Statements Must be Proved
Post number 5389
Posted on July 8, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the video at and at
Materiality Must Be Judged Objectively.
In People Of The State Of California Ex Rel. Heath & Yuen, APC v. Silver Bird Auto Leasing, LLC et al., B342847, California Court of Appeals, Second District, Eighth Division (June 5, 2026) Heath & Yuen, APC defended a tour van driver and related defendants in an underlying auto-collision action brought by Silver Bird Auto Leasing, LLC after a low-speed collision involving Silver Bird’s McLaren and a tour van.
Silver Bird alleged the McLaren was making a legal turn and sought damages including repair costs, loss of use, and diminution in value. The defendants’ insurer later became insolvent, and CIGA took over the defense and ultimately paid $25,000 to settle the underlying action.
After settlement, Heath & Yuen filed a ...
To Prove Fraud Material False Statements Must be Proved
Post number 5389
Posted on July 8, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the video at and at
Materiality Must Be Judged Objectively.
In People Of The State Of California Ex Rel. Heath & Yuen, APC v. Silver Bird Auto Leasing, LLC et al., B342847, California Court of Appeals, Second District, Eighth Division (June 5, 2026) Heath & Yuen, APC defended a tour van driver and related defendants in an underlying auto-collision action brought by Silver Bird Auto Leasing, LLC after a low-speed collision involving Silver Bird’s McLaren and a tour van.
Silver Bird alleged the McLaren was making a legal turn and sought damages including repair costs, loss of use, and diminution in value. The defendants’ insurer later became insolvent, and CIGA took over the defense and ultimately paid $25,000 to settle the underlying action.
After settlement, Heath & Yuen filed a ...
Arsonist Tried To Represent Himself, Failed, and Sought Habeas Relief
Post number 5357
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/he-who-acts-his-own-lawyer-has-idiot-client-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-d4bwc, See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Karacson’s Arson for Profit Attempt Required Skill & Experience to Succeed
In Steve Ellis Karacson v. David Shaver, Warden, No. 25-1089, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit (May 20, 2026) Steve Karacson was convicted in Michigan state court of arson and insurance fraud after evidence showed he burned his own insured home. Investigators found multiple points of origin, gasoline odor, and evidence tying him to the scene, including cell-phone location data and a receipt showing he had purchased a gas can and gloves shortly before the fire.
FACTS
Karacson initially had appointed counsel, but his relationships with both appointed attorneys ...
The Only Solution to Fraud is to Take the Profit Out of the Crime
It Takes Courage to Fight the Fraudster
Post number 5395
Posted on July 16, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In Vivian Maritza Triana Marin, Sebastian Arroyave Penagos, and Daniel Arroyave Penagos v. Marc J. Paynter and Transport Marc Paynter Inc., No. 23-CV-6498, United States District Court, E.D. New York (July 10, 2026) Plaintiffs sued Defendants in diversity after a rear-end collision on the Whitestone Expressway in Queens, New York. Plaintiffs were in a Subaru driven by Vivian Maritza Triana Marin, while Defendant Marc J. Paynter drove a Transport Marc Paynter Inc. tractor-trailer.
Facts:
Dashcam footage from Defendants’ vehicle showed Plaintiffs’ vehicle braking suddenly in the left lane despite an open roadway ahead. Marin could not identify a specific reason for braking, the passenger plaintiffs did not know why she braked, and a non-party witness testified that Plaintiffs’ vehicle stopped abruptly for no apparent reason.
The Accident occurred when ...
THE SOURCE FOR THE INSURANCE FRAUD PROFESSIONAL
Posted on July 15, 2026 by Barry Zalma
ZIFL Volume 30, Issue 14
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 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/
This issue contains the following articles about insurance fraud:Zalma’s Insurance Fraud Letter – July 15, 2026
Posted on July 15, 2026 by Barry Zalma
ZIFL Volume 30, Issue 14
THE SOURCE FOR THE INSURANCE FRAUD PROFESSIONAL
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 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/
This issue contains the following articles ...
Data Breach Requires Plaintiff’s Own Information was Missued
Post number 5394
The Dismissal Based on Lips’s Failure to Plead Injury in Fact,
Posted on July 14, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gDQZc5vP and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5350 posts.
In Danielle Lips, on behaf of hersef and all others similarly situated v. ACCU Reference Medical Lab, LLC, Civil Action No. 25-13642 (SDW) (CF), United States District Court, D. New Jersey (June 24, 2026) a data-breach class action, the District of New Jersey granted Accu Reference Medical Lab, LLC’s motion to dismiss because Plaintiff Danielle Lips failed to plead Article III standing.
FACTS:
Lips alleged that ACCU, a medical testing laboratory, obtained her personally identifiable information and protected health information through diagnostic testing ordered by her former physician. She claimed the Qilin ransomware group stole ACCU’s data and posted screenshots containing some patients’ unredacted information on the...
