Callahan & Fusco recently obtained summary judgment in a Kings County, New York matter. Defendants’ dash camera footage of the accident revealed that the alleged loss was a product of a staged accident. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss and argued that the four Plaintiffs had failed to state a cause of action, as the underlying automobile accident was staged. Ultimately the Kings County Court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claims.
Plaintiffs were driving on Conduit Avenue a few days before Christmas when they abruptly and without warning braked in front of a commercial vehicle. Our investigation revealed: (1) the loss in question occurred approximately a month after the Plaintiffs had purchased the first-party insurance policy in question; (2) Plaintiffs’ “burner car” involved in the accident was also purchased within the same time period for nominal consideration; (3) the accident dynamics met multiple National Insurance Crime Bureau (“NICB”) screening criteria for an intentional and collusive accident; (4) video footage of the accident revealed Plaintiffs’ vehicle suddenly stop without warning or any reason for doing so in the middle of a dark road; (5) Plaintiffs’ vehicle “shadowed” Defendants’ truck prior to the impact; and (6) immediately following the incident, a third vehicle arrives and the driver exits the vehicle to take photos and videos of the collision scene. After the accident, the four Plaintiffs began to treat excessively received physical therapy, chiropractic, acupuncture, diagnostic testing, therapy and durable medical equipment. The four Plaintiffs all attended the same no-fault clinic and retained the same attorney.
Plaintiffs’ First-Party Insurance Carrier also opened an investigation and ultimately filed suit seeking a declaratory judgment that it has no duty to pay for “damages” related to a staged accident. New York Courts routinely hold that an auto accident, which is the product of a staged or cause of event, is not a covered loss under the applicable policy of insurance. (See Allstate v. Massre, 14 AD3d 610 [2d Dept. 2005]). Further, intentional crashes are not “accidents” covered by insurance policies. (See State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Laguerre, 305 AD2d 490, 491 [2d Dept. 2003]).
In this case, Defendants argued that the events leading up to the alleged incident did not constitute an accident and were the product of an intentional incident which were perpetrated solely for the purpose of obtaining insurance proceeds. Further Defendants argued that the video footage revealed Plaintiffs’ vehicle shadowed Defendants’ truck. The footage subsequently showed Plaintiffs’ vehicle intentionally coming to a sudden and complete stop and caused a collision with Defendants’ truck.
The Court ultimately granted the Motion for Summary Judgment in full against the Plaintiffs and dismissed all claims against the Defendants. The Court held that res judicata and the issues decided in the Plaintiffs’ First-Party Insurance Carrier case were conclusive as to any matters actually litigated or that might have been litigated in that action, and precluded the Plaintiffs from maintaining a bodily injury action. This matter exemplifies the importance of coordination between and among insurance carriers and a quick “emergency response” to potentially fraudulent and staged accidents.