August 25, 2025
ShareKelley Kronenberg Secures Fraud on the Court Dismissal in Five-Year Property Case
Kelley Kronenberg Partner/Business Unit Leader Jake D. Huxtable and Practice Partner Zachary A. Schiffman secured an extraordinary victory for First Protective Insurance Company in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court, obtaining one of the most challenging rulings in litigation—a Motion to Dismiss for Fraud Upon the Court in a contentious case spanning five years.
The case involved a breach of contract claim seeking approximately $115,000.00 in alleged property damages. What made this victory particularly significant was the exceptionally high evidentiary burden required for fraud upon the Court dismissals, which demands clear and convincing evidence that a party has “sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter.”
Upon taking over the case, Jake and Zachary developed an aggressive defense strategy that would ultimately expose the fraudulent nature of the plaintiffs’ claims. The breakthrough came when their defense engineering expert conducted a thorough physical inspection of the property and reviewed all available evidence.
The expert’s analysis revealed a stunning discovery: the plaintiffs had never actually replaced the kitchen cabinetry and flooring as they had claimed throughout the litigation. This finding, made within a reasonable degree of engineering certainty, formed the foundation of the fraud motion.
Jake and Zachary strategically presented multiple forms of evidence to support their fraud allegations, including deposition testimony from the plaintiffs and their unlicensed contractor, photographic evidence, and the expert analysis proving the claimed repairs never occurred. This comprehensive presentation demonstrated the systematic nature of the deception.
The Court granted the Motion to Dismiss for Fraud Upon the Court just days before the case was scheduled for trial, completely eliminating First Protective’s exposure and the additional costs and uncertainties associated with litigation. Additionally, the fraud finding positioned the company to recover its attorney’s fees and costs from the plaintiffs.
This exceptional outcome not only protected the client from substantial financial exposure but also reinforced important principles regarding the integrity of the litigation process. The victory demonstrates the critical value of thorough expert analysis and aggressive case development in uncovering fraudulent claims.
Special recognition goes to Carol Martz, Natasha Venson, and Tyrone James at First Protective Insurance Company for their support throughout this complex and demanding case.
For additional successes and details about our first-party property insurance defense practice, click here.
Stay abreast of the latest developments in first-party property insurance law with our newsletter, “In the Know: First-Party Property Appellate Edition.” Get the latest edition here.