Four years ago, the New York Court of Appeals issued its decision in Voss v. Netherlands Ins. Co., 22 N.Y.3d 728 (2014), which some thought might lead to more and more insurance brokers being sued by policyholders alleging that brokers had not obtained sufficient insurance or appropriate policies for them.

Several recent cases—including by the U.S.

After a policyholder submits a claim to an insurance company, the insurer investigates to determine whether to pay the claim, as the insurer is permitted to do under its insurance policy. On occasion, after an insurer has begun to investigate a claim, it may come to believe that the claim is fraudulent, or at least

Twenty-five years ago, in Riordan v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 977 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 1992), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that New York General Business Law §349—one of the most powerful consumer fraud provisions of New York law—was applicable to insurance companies’ interactions with policyholders. In Riordan, the

Over nearly eight years as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara became recognized as a powerful prosecutor in many areas, including government corruption and white-collar crime. Another subject for which he certainly deserves mention is his strong record helping to fight insurance fraud in New York.

Much can be learned

On April 18, 2017, President Trump issued an executive order entitled “Buy American and Hire American.”

The Order states that the Executive Branch’s official policy is “to rigorously enforce and administer the laws governing entry into the United States of workers from abroad,” in an effort “to create higher wages and employment rates for workers

My January column, “Insurers Using Technology to Fight Insurance Fraud,” N.Y.L.J. Jan. 5, 2017, discussed various new forms of technology that insurance companies are using to fight insurance fraud.

These efforts are producing results for insurers—and, in appropriate instances, for federal, state, and local prosecutors—in the battle against insurance fraud. This month’s column highlights a

Insurance fraud has been estimated by some to be as large as an $80-billion-per-year problem. See, e.g., Coalition Against Insurance Fraud, “By the numbers: fraud statistics.”1 To fight insurance fraud, insurance companies, working hand-in-hand with their lawyers, have begun to adopt new kinds of technology. These tools—ranging from social media to data analytics—are being used

The federal False Claims Act (FCA)1 is a powerful tool in the fight against fraud involving federal health insurance programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Indeed, one of the greatest areas of FCA success is in the health-care industry. From 1987 to 2015, the federal government recovered more than $31.1 billion in health-care-related FCA actions.2

In a civil case involving claims of insurance fraud, the fact-finder is properly instructed to consider factors beyond the formal indicia of ownership in determining the actual ownership of a medical services professional corporation (PC) for purposes of examining the PC’s entitlement to payment from an insurance carrier of claims assigned to the PC by

The six significant insurance law decisions issued this past term by the New York Court of Appeals covered a wide range of issues. Five of the cases were decided by a unanimous Court, with a dissent (by Judge Eugene M. Fahey) occurring only in one.1 Four different judges wrote an opinion for the Court (Judge