GPS data thwarts insurance fraud scheme.

GPS data thwarts insurance fraud scheme.

A Cuyahoga County man’s conviction for insurance fraud for attempting to report his work truck stolen was affirmed by the Eighth District Court of Appeals.

In June 2023, Matthew McGrath reported the theft of his truck, attached plow, salt spreader, and crack filler from an apartment complex. But GPS monitoring from a prior unrelated case revealed McGrath’s plot to reap insurance benefits by claiming the items were stolen.

McGrath was found guilty of two charges, insurance fraud and attempted grand theft, by the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court in August 2023. He appealed the convictions, arguing that the evidence brought against him by the state wasn’t sufficient for a guilty verdict.

In the Eighth District’s recent opinion,  Judge Deena R. Calabrese affirmed the trial court’s findings. Judge Calabrese wrote, “There was ample evidence to support the trial court’s ultimate conclusion that the appellant filed a false police report with the intention of securing insurance proceeds … .”

Insurance Fraud Scheme Unravels
McGrath reported the theft of his vehicle and the equipment to be used for pavement crack-filling work to the University Heights Police Department. The losses of equipment totaled $49,900. Officer Brandon Manley interviewed McGrath, and body camera footage also captured McGrath’s claims. Manley searched area law enforcement results from license plate readers and searched the area where the vehicle was last seen, but he was unable to locate the vehicle.

McGrath reported to his insurer, Westfield Insurance, that his vehicle and the equipment were stolen. A few weeks later, Christie Paolino, a Westfield special investigator, interviewed McGrath. In the interview, McGrath reported that he had last seen the truck two days before it was stolen, contradicting his statements to the police. He told Manley he saw the vehicle the previous evening before reporting it had been stolen. While on McGrath’s property for the interview, Paolino also saw a snowplow. McGrath verbally confirmed it was the plow he reported stolen.

Prior to the interview, Paolino did a background check on the vehicle and discovered license plate photos of the truck in a lot filled with vehicles. The photos taken from a license plate reader showed the vehicle parked in the lot on the night it was reported stolen. The lot belonged to Quality Automotive, a Brook Park business located about two miles from McGrath’s home. After interviewing McGrath, Paolino traveled to Quality Automotive, located the truck, and noticed the license plate had been removed. She confirmed with police that it was the truck reported stolen. Westfield didn’t pay McGrath’s insurance claim.

Defendant’s Device Data Reports His Whereabouts
Upon further investigation,, the University Heights Police Department discovered McGrath was wearing a GPS monitoring device at the time of the theft for an unrelated case. Using GPS data, a police sergeant discovered McGrath was in the exact place where the vehicle was recovered an hour before the initial theft report to police.

When asked about his whereabouts prior to making the police report, McGrath stated he was at the location where he was set to do pavement work and denied being at Quality Automotive. However, when presented with the GPS data, he changed his answer and said he was at the lot earlier in the day.

Police stated they had a reasonable belief that McGrath orchestrated the alleged theft. They charged him with insurance fraud and attempted grand theft, for attempting to secure insurance proceeds in excess of $7,500.

Appeals Court Affirms Trial Court Decision
The Eighth District analyzed the evidence presented against McGrath.

The opinion stated that McGrath challenged the sufficiency of evidence against him. Appellate courts are tasked with assessing whether the evidence “‘if believed ... would support a conviction,” the opinion noted. The Eighth District found that the bodycam footage, contradictory statements, and GPS data were sufficient to convict him of insurance fraud and attempted grand theft.

“The evidence reflects that Paolino’s suspicions were confirmed by concrete evidence of appellant's movements on the day he reported the vehicle missing. GPS placed appellant at the vehicle-recovery site, Quality Automotive, just one hour before he made his stolen vehicle report,” the court stated.

Judge Mary J. Boyle and retired Judge William A. Klatt, sitting by assignment, joined the opinion.

State v. McGrath, 2025-Ohio-2600.

Please note: Opinion summaries are prepared by the Office of Public Information for the general public and news media. Opinion summaries are not prepared for every opinion, but only for noteworthy cases. Opinion summaries are not to be considered as official headnotes or syllabi of court opinions. The full text of this and other court opinions are available online.

PDF files may be viewed, printed, and searched using the free Acrobat^® Reader
Acrobat Reader is a trademark of Adobe Systems Incorporated.