Liars Must Always Lose

False Medical History Defeats No Fault Claim

Posted on August 24, 2023 by Barry Zalma

This case arose out of an accident that occurred in 2019. Plaintiff was hit
by a car at around 8:15 p.m. while riding a bicycle in Flint, Michigan.
Plaintiff sustained serious injuries, including multiple broken bones
and lacerations, blunt force trauma to the chest and abdomen, and a
traumatic brain injury. However he submitted a claim with false
representations about his past medical history and his suit was
dismissed.

Ronnie Fields appealed the trial court’s order granting summary
disposition to defendant, Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company. In Ronnie
Fields and Anderson Medical Supplies v. National General Insurance
Company, Integon National Insurance Company, Garlando Doxie, Kanesha
Marzette, and Michigan Automobile Insurance, Defendants, and Nationwide
Mutual Fire Insurance Company, No. 361959, Court of Appeals of Michigan (August 17, 2023) the Court of Appeals gave effect to the allegations of fraud.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

In relation to the accident, plaintiff submitted two applications for
personal protection insurance (PIP) benefits through the Michigan
Automobile Insurance Placement Facility (MAIPF). The applications stated
that plaintiff did not have any of the same injuries prior to the
accident, that he had no preexisting medical conditions, and that he had
not applied for social security benefits before or after the accident. 
However, his second application noted that plaintiff was eligible for
social security benefits, contrary to the information from the October
4, 2019 application. Each of the applications contained a fraud warning.
Plaintiff sued in February 2020 the MAIPF was required to assign his
claim to an insurer.

The MAIPF eventually assigned his claim to Nationwide, and Nationwide was substituted as a defendant.  Nationwide ultimately filed a motion for summary disposition and alleged that plaintiff committed fraud by submitting false information in support of his claim for PIP benefits, and that he was, therefore, ineligible to receive benefits. Nationwide also alleged that plaintiff failed to
disclose that he had eye surgery prior to the accident and that he is
legally blind. Nationwide claimed that plaintiff violated the statute by
knowingly submitting false statements in support of his claim for
benefits.

The trial court entered an order granting Nationwide’s motion for summary disposition.

FRAUD

A person commits a fraudulent insurance act when: (1) the person
presents or causes to be presented an oral or written statement, (2) the
statement is part of or in support of a claim for no-fault benefits,
and (3) the claim for benefits was submitted to the MAIPF. Further, (4)
the person must have known that the statement contained false
information, and (5) the statement concerned a fact or thing material to
the claim.

THE LIES

Finding no dispute that the two applications for benefits erroneously
indicated that plaintiff had no preexisting medical conditions and had
not sustained any prior injuries that might be relevant to his claim for
benefits, Plaintiff’s deposition testimony and medical records
ultimately revealed that between 2012 and 2019, he was treated for
complications arising from the dog bite and for injuries sustained after
someone struck him with a baseball bat, including a leg fracture.
Additionally, it is undisputed that plaintiff is legally blind, which
was not disclosed on either application. The October 4, 2019 application
also noted that plaintiff was not eligible for social security
benefits, which was ultimately determined to be a false statement.

LiarsPhoto byBarry Zalma

ANALYSIS

Plaintiff’s medical records could be considered as evidence of fraud
even though the medical records were obtained by Nationwide during
discovery, the information contained in them concerned incidents that
occurred well before plaintiff applied for PIP benefits through the
MAIPF. Although such evidence would not directly show that plaintiff
engaged in fraud, the medical records pertain to incidents that happened
well before litigation commenced. Consequently, they were properly
considered by the trial court as documentary evidence in support of
Nationwide’s fraud assertion.

Plaintiff signed the applications, suggesting that they must be
considered his own. He argued that it is unclear whether he knew what he
was signing, as he was legally blind at the time and would have needed
someone to read the document to him.

Plaintiff’s medical records were not improperly considered as
evidence of fraud. Moreover, since plaintiff signed the
applications-particularly the November 4, 2019 application-and has
provided no evidentiary proof to support the argument that he lacked the
capacity to do so, that he did so by mistake, or that he was coerced or
defrauded in this case, the trial court’s ruling was affirmed.

ZALMA OPINION

Even no-fault insurance statutes remove the right to benefits if the
person seeking the benefits commits fraud in seeking the benefits. There
is no question that the Plaintiff filed two applications for benefits
that contained false statements. As a result, even though he was
seriously injured, his fraudulent statements defeated his claim, proving
that liars in Michigan will never prosper from the no-fault system.
(c) 2023 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. (c) 2023 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.