FOLLOW US

What the City Says Was Happening

• New York City says Asher & Associates repeatedly blamed potholes and defective streets for injuries that medical records tied to fights, crashes and other events.
• The federal civil case seeks triple damages under RICO and New York false-claims laws, potentially turning disputed injury suits into a much larger fraud case.
• The complaint does not accuse doctors or clinics of participating in the alleged scheme — but it does accuse unnamed client “runners” and litigation funders, while alleging some clients knowingly backed false stories.

NEW YORK — A Manhattan personal injury law firm that has spent years suing New York City is now on the other side of the caption.

The City of New York filed an 80-page federal complaint against Asher & Associates, P.C., Ryan H. Asher and Roberta D. Asher, accusing them of operating a years-long scheme that took genuine injuries and allegedly changed one crucial fact — who caused them.

The case is City of New York v. Ryan H. Asher, et al., No. 1:26-cv-08753 (S.D.N.Y. filed Oct. 4, 2026). It is assigned to U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos, with Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn designated for referred matters.

According to the complaint, some clients really were hurt. That distinction matters. The City is not simply alleging fake injuries.

Instead, city lawyers say injuries allegedly caused by assaults, hit-and-run drivers, vehicle collisions or even a claimant's own actions were later presented as accidents caused by defective New York roadways. The complaint identifies 15 examples and alleges they may represent only a fraction of the firm's cases. New York City Government

One claim sought $3 million after a client allegedly suffered injuries because of a defective Brooklyn roadway. Medical records, according to the City, instead described injuries connected to a fight. Another $3 million claim blamed a Manhattan street hole for an electric-scooter accident even though hospital personnel were allegedly told about an automobile accident.

That difference is enormous legally. A broken bone can be completely real while the claim for who must pay for it can still be fraudulent.

The City alleges Asher attorneys possessed medical records containing conflicting accident histories while submitting notices of claim and litigation documents asserting City liability. It alleges the conduct amounted to mail and wire fraud forming a pattern of racketeering under federal RICO, along with violations of the New York State and New York City False Claims Acts. New York City Government

Asher & Associates is fighting back. Attorney Matthew Laroche of Milbank, now representing the firm, told a reporter that the City is improperly trying to turn legitimate personal injury litigation into a racketeering case and characterized the lawsuit as an attack on injured New Yorkers and the lawyers who represent them.

There is an important insurance story here as well.

New York City effectively bears much of its own tort risk rather than simply forwarding these cases to a conventional liability insurer; City materials have long described New York as self-insured for personal-injury and property-damage risks, meaning settlements and judgments can ultimately reach public funds. The Comptroller investigates claims before litigation and can settle them when liability appears justified. New York City Government

But the alleged scheme also could affect private insurers. The City says Asher routinely filed parallel actions against utilities and paving contractors whose work allegedly contributed to roadway defects. Those companies may have commercial liability insurers paying defense costs or settlements. A fabricated accident theory can spread costs well beyond City Hall. New York City Government

What about doctors or clinics routinely treating the firm's clients?

So far, the City's complaint does not allege that any preferred physician, medical clinic or treatment provider participated in the scheme. In fact, medical records often play the opposite role in the complaint — they are the evidence the City says exposed discrepancies between what patients originally reported and what later appeared in legal claims. That is materially different from other New York insurance-fraud cases in which medical providers themselves are accused of participating.

The complaint does, however, identify unnamed “runners” who allegedly supplied potential clients and unnamed litigation funders who advanced expenses. The City alleges those participants knew certain claims relied on false narratives. New York City Government

And the clients themselves could become a major issue.

If a claimant knowingly agreed to a fabricated account, signed a false notice of claim, repeated it during sworn testimony or knowingly participated in obtaining money through that story, potential exposure could extend beyond losing the personal injury case. Depending on the evidence, knowingly false sworn testimony can raise perjury concerns, while intentional participation in a scheme to obtain money could create civil or potentially criminal fraud exposure.

The City goes further than merely blaming attorneys: its complaint alleges runners provided clients willing to give false testimony and claims that clients were induced to repeat false causation accounts during municipal hearings and depositions. Those remain allegations, not findings, and the 15 personal-injury clients are not presently named as defendants in this federal action. New York City Government

The procedural posture is still early. The complaint was filed Oct. 4 and summonses were issued Oct. 5. As of the publicly available docket reviewed by USA Herald, no proof of service establishing a specific answer deadline had appeared. Under the normal federal rule, a defendant generally has 21 days after service to answer or file a Rule 12 response. Justia Dockets & Filings

The stakes are substantial. The City seeks treble damages under RICO, treble damages under state and city false-claims laws, statutory penalties, attorneys' fees and an injunction that could require medical records to accompany future notices of claim.

Full complaint: Read the City of New York’s 80-page federal complaint

NYC official announcement: New York City Law Department announcement

Federal docket: City of New York v. Asher docket

About the Author

Samuel López is a reporter and correspondent for USA Herald who has reported for the publication since 2022. He is also a seasoned legal professional with more than two decades of experience analyzing state and federal litigation, complex civil disputes and insurance-related matters. His legal and insurance background informs his reporting on litigation strategy, claim handling, fraud allegations and the financial consequences lawsuits can create beyond the courtroom.

Keep Reading Beyond the Headlines

If you enjoyed this report, get USA Herald's legal, insurance and investigative coverage delivered directly to you. Our newsletter follows the filings, evidence and courtroom developments that often disappear after the first headline.

Subscribe to the USA Herald newsletter

👉 Follow USA Herald on X