Legal Question in Criminal Law in Missouri

I have a friend that was fired from her job when she was 7 months pregnant. This company denied her unemployment claim. She did win after an appeal hearing. A few days later, the company accused her of stealing $6.000.00 from them. She was questioned by the police. No charges were ever filed.. Now, almost 15 months later, the insurance company is suing her for almost 12,000.00. The company filed a claim with thier insurance to get back this money. Now, my question is If there were any proof that she did take this money, wouldn't the prosecuting attourney have filed charges against her? She didn't take the money. She is very concerned that somehow she will lose this if it goes to court. They told her she could settle for an amount and even make payments! She says NO WAY. She didn't take the money and she's not going to make any deals. How can this insurance company try to go after her with out any kind of proof? They have absolutly nothing.


Asked on 10/08/09, 2:16 pm

2 Answers from Attorneys

Anthony Smith LawSmith

Since when does a insurance company need a good reason to do something to make or save them money. Most insurers think they run the world. Many threaten law suits and raise spurious defenses to litigation everyday. It does not mean that they always win. The truth is what it is. However, the evidence to prove theft in a civil suit is not always the same as in a criminal prosecution. One can get a civil judgmetn where the prosecutor chose nto to proceed. If your friend did not take the money, and there is an insurance company saying she did, then she should consult directly with counsel immediately. If the comapny had evidence that she stole money, don't you think they would have raised it in the appeal of their unemployment denial?

Good luck

Read more
Answered on 10/08/09, 2:33 pm
J. Matthew Guilfoil The Guilfoil Law Group, L.L.C.

Civil burden of proof is preponderance of the evidence, (only approx. 51%). Criminal case burden is much higher with beyond a reasonable doubt. Think OJ being acquitted criminally, but still losing millions in civil liability as a famous lay example. Just because the prosecutor chose not to proceed with the case in the criminal setting does not preclude an insurance company from attempting to subrogate their money back from her that they paid out if they think they can convince a judge or jury that it's 51% likely she did do it. Winning the civil benefits hearing is a good sign but does not dispose of the claim against her. She had better get a lawyer to vigorously defend her. Insurance defense lawyers are cut throat and will eat her alive pro se without good representation, regardless of what you think of the merits of their case against her. Please do not underestimate the situation and do get competent counsel to defend you.

Read more
Answered on 10/08/09, 2:45 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Criminal Law questions and answers in Missouri