Federal Probe of Corrupt Judges includes Insurance Fraud

A constant refrain from disgraced Judges Conahan and Ciavarella has been the one that yes we made mistakes but we were not really criminals. The continuing and widening federal probe into both men shows the lie in that claim of "We are Not Crooks"

Yes you are!

Both Judges are criminals,fraudsters and con men, they have swindled and embezzled millions of dollars to enrich themselves. The costs are staggering in one of the worst and egregious cases of Judicial Criminal behavior in recent US History.

Eastern Pennsylvania Taxpayers paid thru the nose for kickbacks and perverted Justice, then there is the cost of irreparable damage to Juveniles wrongly jailed (Kids sold for Cash),citizens who expected impartial justice and were defrauded, and finally the public shame and lack of trust in what should be a pillar of any Western Civilization..

The Rule Of Law, The American belief repeatedly shattered that Justice is blind.

In this case Lady Justice had her hands in the till!




Uninsured motorist benefits award looked at amid judicial corruption probe.

source Times Leader
By Terrie Morgan-Besecker
Law & Order Reporter

WILKES-BARRE – An attorney for an insurance company that’s challenging a controversial $500,000 award of uninsured motorist benefits to a man confirmed that federal authorities have asked him to provide information on the case.

James Haggerty of Philadelphia said the U.S. Attorney’s Office asked for certain documents in the case of Forester Vanderhoff versus Harleysville Insurance after The Times Leader published a story on March 8 detailing the insurance company’s continuing efforts to overturn the monetary award.

“We were asked to provide some matters of public record,” Haggerty said.

The case is among numerous arbitration awards issued in Luzerne and Lackawanna counties that have reportedly been under investigation by authorities in an ongoing probe of alleged judicial corruption.

A source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, confirmed federal authorities are now investigating uninsured motorist benefit claims filed in both counties.

The Legal Intelligencer, a Philadelphia-based law journal, reported Friday that the U.S. Attorney’s Office had issued a subpoena to Harleysville requesting a wide range of information regarding uninsured and underinsured motorist claims originating from the two counties.

The article, which quoted unnamed sources, said the subpoena sought all records identifying the plaintiff’s attorney, the arbitrators appointed and the amount of the award or settlement in all uninsured and underinsured motorist cases from Jan. 1, 2003, to present that were heard in Luzerne and Lackawanna counties.

The Intelligencer said the subpoena also requested any records relating to internal or insurance industry investigations regarding uninsured motorist claims in the two counties, as well as a list of all cases in which the appointment of a neural arbitrator was filed.

Several attorneys have previously told The Times Leader that insurance companies for years have questioned whether there was impropriety in the handling of uninsured motorist cases in Luzerne County based on the disproportionately high-dollar awards being rendered by arbitration panels.

The subpoena reported by the Intelligencer is the first indication that authorities have expanded the probe to include Lackawanna County.

U.S. Attorney Martin Carlson declined comment Monday, citing his policy to neither confirm nor deny the existence of an investigation.

Uninsured motorist insurance allows a person injured by a driver who has no or little insurance to seek to recover damages from their own insurance company.

Disputes over the amount of money due are decided by a three-member arbitration panel consisting of three attorneys – one appointed by the plaintiff, one by the defense and a third, neutral arbitrator chosen by both sides. If the defense and plaintiff can’t agree on the neutral, a judge can make the appointment.

Cases in Luzerne County came under increased scrutiny in the wake of the corruption charges recently filed against former judges Michael Conahan and Mark Ciavarella, who have admitted accepting kickbacks in exchange for rulings that favored a juvenile detention center’s owner and builder.

Robert Panowicz, a Wilkes-Barre attorney who represented Erie Insurance for decades, said allegations are that some plaintiffs’ attorneys have been in collusion with one another and certain judges, resulting in the appointment of neutral arbitrators who are not truly neutral.

Panowicz said he was interviewed several years ago by a fraud investigator with the National Insurance Crime Bureau, an agency funded by insurance companies, but never heard back about the status of the investigation.

In the Vanderhoff case, Haggerty had challenged Conahan’s determination that Vanderhoff’s testimony regarding the existence of a third vehicle at a crash scene was more credible than that of the other driver and a police officer.

Vanderhoff acknowledged he rear-ended a car driven by Ryan Piontkowski at the Sans Souci Parkway and West End Road in Hanover Township on Oct. 4, 2001. Several months after the accident, he filed a report with Harleysville in which he claimed a third, “phantom” vehicle pulled in front of Piontkowski, forcing him to stop abruptly and leaving Vanderhoff insufficient time to brake.

That allowed Vanderhoff to seek to recover uninsured motorist benefits based on the argument that the “phantom” vehicle was uninsured.

The problem, Haggerty argued, is Piontkowski denied there was a third vehicle. The investigating officer, Sgt. Andrew Kratz, also testified that neither Vanderhoff nor Piontkowski mentioned the third vehicle when he was investigating the crash.

Despite that, Conahan ruled Vanderhoff had told the officer of the third vehicle. That allowed the case to then go before an arbitration panel, which awarded Vanderhoff $500,000.

In a an interview earlier this month, Haggerty said he was stunned by the fact Conahan believed Vanderhoff – the only person who had something to gain – over Piontkowski and Kratz, who were disinterested parties.

“It appeared to be at odds with the evidence and testimony presented to the court,” Haggerty said.

Haggerty appealed to the state Superior Court, which overturned Conahan based on a separate argument that Vanderhoff had not reported the phantom vehicle within the required time frame. The state Supreme Court later agreed to hear an appeal of that ruling. The high court has not yet ruled on the matter.