Insurance companies and defense lawyers sometimes accuse an injured person of fraud during a case, usually based on inconsistencies in discovery responses, deposition testimony, medical history, or prior accident disclosures. Florida courts treat those accusations seriously. In some situations, a judge can dismiss an entire injury claim if the court finds that misrepresentations or omissions went to the heart of the case and undermined the integrity of the process.
A recent decision from Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a dismissal, finding that the trial court concluded the case involved fraud on the court. The opinion serves as a reminder that accuracy in written answers and testimony is not optional, even when the questions feel overly broad or the timeline feels hard to reconstruct months or years later.
Fraud on the Court in Florida
“Fraud on the court” refers to conduct that corrupts the judicial process itself, not simply a disagreement about facts. Courts look for patterns of deception, material omissions, or statements that appear designed to conceal prior injuries, medical treatment, or other facts central to the damages being claimed.
A single mistake does not automatically equal fraud. Many injured people answer questions imperfectly, especially under stress or with incomplete records. Fraud findings tend to involve repeated misstatements, strategic omissions, or contradictions that a judge concludes could not have occurred by accident.
Dismissal for Fraud, Florida Personal Injury
Florida trial courts have the authority to dismiss a case when fraud undermines the integrity of the action. Appellate courts have repeatedly recognized that dismissal may be appropriate when false or incomplete discovery responses strike at the core issues in the case, such as causation, prior injury history, or the scope of damages.
Dismissal is an extreme remedy. Courts still impose it in the right circumstances. From a practical standpoint, that reality means an injured person should treat every interrogatory answer, document request, and deposition question as part of the record that can be tested later against medical charts, prior claims, employment files, and even older deposition transcripts from unrelated matters.
Deposition Testimony and Prior Medical History
Many fraud allegations start with prior medical history. Defense counsel often asks about earlier injuries, prior accidents, prior imaging, and similar symptoms. Insurance carriers also closely examine gaps between what an injured person remembers and what the records show.
Memory can be imperfect. A person might forget a short course of physical therapy from years earlier or a visit to an urgent care clinic. Problems arise when testimony or written answers create the impression of a clean slate, only to be contradicted later by records showing significant prior complaints or repeated treatment for the same body part. The risk increases when the new case involves the neck, back, shoulders, knees, or other areas where people commonly have earlier injuries.
Accuracy improves when the injured person takes time to reconstruct the timeline before testimony and when counsel requests prior records early. A careful approach also helps reduce the risk that the defense will frame normal memory gaps as deception.
Interrogatories and Discovery Responses
Written discovery answers often carry more risk than people expect. Interrogatories can ask for every prior accident, every provider, and every diagnostic test. Those questions can span decades. They can also cover workers’ compensation claims, chiropractic care, pain management, and emergency room visits.
A thoughtful response usually starts with a good-faith effort to identify prior treatment, then updates the answers as new information comes in. Courts are more likely to view a timeline as honest when it gets corrected promptly after new records appear. Silence can look like concealment when a correction would have been easy.
Workers’ Compensation Claims and Overlapping Injuries
Fraud accusations sometimes arise in cases that involve both a work injury and a separate crash. A workers’ compensation file may include prior complaints, work restrictions, or earlier imaging that overlap with the injury being claimed in a separate case.
That overlap does not, by itself, defeat a claim. It does create a need for consistent, careful disclosure. A person can have a preexisting condition and still suffer a new injury or a serious aggravation. The case becomes harder to prove when the record looks inconsistent across systems, especially if one file describes symptoms as resolved and another file later suggests they never existed.
Insurance Investigation and Claims Handling
Insurance companies also evaluate credibility early. Adjusters and investigators compare social media, recorded statements, prior claim histories, and medical records. They look for inconsistencies that can reduce payout value or support a defense strategy. That scrutiny increases in high-value claims, commercial vehicle collisions, and cases involving extended treatment.
The best protection is simple: tell the truth, avoid exaggeration, and correct errors quickly. An injured person does not need a perfect memory. A claim does need a record that holds together when tested against documents.
Steps That Help Avoid a Fraud Allegation
Clear communication with counsel at the start reduces risk. An injured person benefits from gathering a list of prior providers, approximate dates of prior injuries, and any known prior claims. Honesty about prior symptoms also helps the medical team document what changed after the new incident.
Depositions also go better when the injured person feels comfortable saying “I do not remember” when that is true, rather than offering to check records rather than guessing. Guessing can create inconsistencies that later become the centerpiece of a fraud motion.
Contact a Florida Personal Injury Attorney
Fraud allegations can derail a legitimate injury claim, especially when written discovery or testimony contains avoidable errors. Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A. can review the facts, the records, and the procedural posture to help you understand what is at stake and what steps may still be available. A conversation early in the process often helps prevent issues that become harder to fix later. Call (877) 448-8585 to discuss your situation and next steps.