An image that reads 'Celebrate Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month'.
DEI Upcoming Events
May 25, 2022
An image of RK Law's Cathleen Kelly Rebar.
Firm Success Alert
June 8, 2022

Connecticut Identity Fraud in Provision Healthcare

An image of RK Law's Cathleen Kelly Rebar and Karen T. Murolo.

Early dismissal of the Complaint, resulting in significant cost savings to the insured and insurer, was achieved by Rebar Kelly in the Superior Court of Waterbury, Connecticut.  On April 29, 2022, the Court granted judgment on the pleadings against the Plaintiff who allegedly was impersonated by her sibling and, consequently to whom medical and other services were rendered by the Defendants.  With no knowledge of the impersonation, the Defendants sought to collect on debts which were not incurred by the Plaintiff resulting from the impersonation.  The Plaintiff alleged that she sustained severe emotional distress, trauma and anxiety with physical symptoms, and that she additionally incurred damages adversely affecting her credit, legal fees and medical bills. The Plaintiff furthermore requested punitive damages, legal fees and costs.  The Court dismissed each of the Plaintiff’s three claims as failing to state a claim on which relief could be granted.  The Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s negligence claim, in the absence of any duty owed by the Defendants to the Plaintiff to control the conduct of a third party, as well as public policy disfavoring the imposition of liability in such circumstances.  With respect to the Plaintiff’s claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress, the Court reasoned that the Defendants could not have foreseen the Plaintiff’s distress which, to the Court, was unreasonable, because the Defendants’ attempts to collect on the debt for services rendered resulted from fraud committed by the Plaintiff’s sibling. Finally, the Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendants violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, by not correcting incorrect information towards restoring the Plaintiff’s credit, because of preemption by federal law, the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

This site uses cookies to improve your user experience. Read More