Courts Confront Manufactured Claims Head On

www.theclm.org, February 25, 2026

Construction-related personal injury litigation in New York is increasingly being litigated on a broader stage than the job site itself. Defendants and insurers are seeing a growing number of cases that share common features—such as repeat medical providers, overlapping witnesses, standardized treatment protocols, and rapidly escalating damages demands—that suggest coordination rather than coincidence. These patterns have sharpened the focus on fraud, not as an afterthought to contract or negligence claims, but as a central issue affecting discovery, motion practice, and case strategy.

The First Department’s recent decision in Lituma v. Liberty Coca-Cola Beverages, LLC, 2025 NY Slip Op 06389 (App. Div. 1st Dept. Nov. 20, 2025) is emblematic of this shift. Rather than treating fraud allegations as confined to pleadings or limited to the accident itself, the court recognized that evidence of recurring players and financial relationships may justify expanded discovery, even late in the litigation. The ruling underscores a growing judicial willingness to examine whether construction injury claims are being driven by organized networks—including third-party litigation funding—and adjust procedural boundaries accordingly.

A Familiar Script

Suspicious construction-related injury claims frequently follow a predictable pattern: Plaintiffs are quickly referred to a small universe of preferred medical providers, treatment protocols appear uniform across unrelated cases, diagnoses escalate rapidly, damages demands far exceed objective findings, and, in many instances, the same constellation of lawyers, providers, and “independent” witnesses reappears across multiple actions. Continue article