قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / Criminal caused lawsuit for policy to drag on for more than six years

Criminal caused lawsuit for policy to drag on for more than six years



U.S. District Judge Gary R. Brown faced a legal dispute that, perhaps because the defendant was a criminal, lasted for several years without a final disposition. I Principal Life Insurance Company v. Jason P. Brand, no. CV 15-CV-3804, United States District Court, E.D. New York (September 29, 2021), the case was reduced to seven years due to disputes that seemed relatively simple:

  1. Defendant Brand received disability insurance in early 2012 from Plaintiff Principal Life, after being less concerned about his medical history.
  2. In June 2014 – before the defendant's disability claim was filed on November 14, 2014 – the new York State Attorney Generals office raided the defendant's office and confiscated his computers and physical files, leading to prosecution on October 16, 2014 against the defendant and his company, DASO Development Corp. and Narco Freedom, Inc., for first-degree insurance fraud and second-degree theft, charges against which the defendant would plead guilty.
  3. The defendant filed a disability claim based on anxiety;
  4. Principal Life acted on his page quickly and repealed the policy and
  5. filed a declaratory relief measure.

ANALYSIS

This litigation has been ongoing since then. The case, in which the defendant was not originally represented, gave rise to an unconscious level of over-processing that added unnecessary complexity. After more than six years of litigation, hundreds of court applications and about 75 decisions issued by at least five different court officials, the case was brought before Magistrate Judge Wicks. from both parties. His conclusions and conclusions were straightforward and simple:

  • the clear language of the police prevented the plaintiff from revoking the policy in the absence of a judicial assessment of fraud.
  • The alleged disability, which undoubtedly stemmed from the defendant's criminal conduct, was expressly excluded.

Judge Brown concluded that Judge Wicks Report, which introduced clarity in the morass created by the judicial parties, should well end the case.

But the pandemonium continued with both parties questioning the recommendations. Both parties objected, on several far-reaching grounds, to Judge Wick's decision.

As a result, Judge Brown was required to review the R&R, and realized that he could accept, reject or change, in whole or in part, the judge's observations or recommendations. [19659011] Judge Brown, well acquainted with this question, conducted a thorough examination of Judge Wick's well-thought-out and thorough R&R. Judge Wick's decision turned out to be free from clear errors. Nor do any of the issues raised through an objection call for an amendment of the opinion. remains entitled to a decision that termination was and / or is appropriate.

The appellant continues to claim that it had the right to terminate the insurance on its own authority without a legal declaration of fraud. The plaintiff lacked the authority to unilaterally terminate the insurance in 2015, as more than two years had elapsed, and the insurance specifically required a legal declaration of fraud prior to termination.

entitled to coverage under the insurance. In other words, since Principal Life has been relieved of its obligation to pay the disputed claim, there remains no "substantial controversy" between the parties that would justify a declaratory judgment.

In fact, Judge Wick's decision actually secures the substance. of the relief sought by the plaintiff in this action. Further decisions of this court would constitute an advisory opinion.

Defendant's objections

Defendant's main objection stems from an alleged failure of the plaintiff to address the policy's exclusion from criminal conduct prior to summary judgment. [19] establish that the defendant was not only involved in criminal activity, or that odd distinctions between criminal activity and criminal profession are not useful given the extent of the exclusion in question. The policy clearly excludes damages caused "in whole or in part…, Contributed to by or results [ing] from… Commission… Or attempt to commit a felony").

Judge Brown concluded, on a Salomon -like manner:

"Excessive ink has been spilled, effort consumed and resources consumed in this case. For the reasons stated above, the court hereby adopts R&R in its entirety. The clerk shall pass judgment in favor of the plaintiff in accordance with this order and close the case. "

People who commit insurance fraud are extremely legal. Pulling out the case for more than six years before more than five judges is difficult to understand. Arguing against a profit – just as the insurer did – is quite simple stupid and the insurer should refuse to pay fees for its agent who filed the objections.The case was simple – the insured was a criminal whose claim to disability was due to his criminal behavior and therefore was clear and unequivocally excluded. I was surprised that Judge Brown did not impose sanctions on the parties for wasting the court's time with a painful over-trial.


© 2021 – Barry Zalma

Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to service. as an insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance claims handling, insurance fraud and insurance fraud almost equally for insurers and policyholders.

He also acts as an arbitrator or mediator for insurance-related disputes. He practiced law in California for more than 44 years as a lawyer for insurance coverage and claims management and more than 54 years in the insurance industry.

He is available at http://www.zalma.com and zalma@zalma.com. Zalma is the first recipient of the first annual Claims Magazine / ACE Legend Award. For the past 53 years, Barry Zalma has devoted his life to insurance, insurance claims and the need to defeat insurance fraud. He has created the following library of books and other materials to enable insurers and their claims staff to become professionals in insurance claims.

Go to my articles at https://zalma.substack.com, the podcast Zalma On Insurance at https : //anchor.fm/barry-zalma; Follow Mr Zalma on Twitter at https://twitter.com/bzalma ; Go to Barry Zalma videos at https://www.rumble.com/zalma; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to Insurance Claims Library – https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library/ T the last two issues of ZIFL are available at https://zalma.com/zalmas-insurance-fraud- letter -2 / podcast now available at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/zalma-on-insurance/id1509583809?uo=4


Source link