- American Transit Insurance withdrew its civil fraud claims against Dr. Emmanuel Hostin and Hostin Orthopaedics & Sports Medicine in July 2025, dismissing the case against him with prejudice.
- The insurer agreed to pay Hostin’s submitted invoices and publicly expressed regret over speculation involving his family. At the time, it had reached settlements with 161 of the original 180 defendants.
- The broader lawsuit sought more than $153 mn in compensatory damages and more than $459 mn in treble damages over alleged abuses of New York’s no-fault auto insurance system.
American Transit Insurance Co. withdrew its medical fraud lawsuit against orthopedic surgeon Dr. Emmanuel Hostin, the husband of television personality Sunny Hostin, in July 2025, ending his involvement in a major New York insurance fraud case involving dozens of medical providers and surgical facilities.
The insurer filed a stipulation of voluntary dismissal on July 8, 2025, covering Hostin and his practice, Hostin Orthopaedics & Sports Medicine. Two days later, American Transit confirmed that it had dismissed its claims against him with prejudice, agreed to pay his submitted medical invoices and expressed regret over the public speculation arising from the allegations.
The dismissal with prejudice prevents the insurer from bringing the same claims against Hostin again. It does not constitute a judicial determination of whether the original allegations were true.
American Transit acknowledged that Hostin had been included in the litigation primarily because of his minority ownership interest in a surgical center involved in the dispute. The company said it reconsidered its position following discussions with Hostin’s attorneys and its own investigation.
The outcome followed months of legal challenges from Hostin’s representatives, who consistently rejected the fraud allegations.
Attorney Daniel Thwaites previously described the lawsuit as meritless and maintained that Hostin denied every allegation. Following the withdrawal, attorney Mark Geragos said the insurer had agreed to pay outstanding bills and publicly apologized to the Hostin family.
American Transit had originally filed the civil complaint on December 17, 2024, in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
The litigation named numerous ambulatory surgical centers, orthopedic medical practices and individual physicians. It was reported as one of the largest civil cases brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) in New York.
The insurer, which provides coverage for taxis and drivers working with ride-hailing services including Uber and Lyft, sought more than $153 mn in compensatory damages and more than $459 mn in treble damages.
By July 2025, American Transit had reached settlements with 161 of the original 180 defendants, according to court documents cited at the time by InsuranceNewsNet. That figure describes the position when Hostin’s dismissal was reported, rather than a verified October 2026 litigation total.
American Transit’s original complaint alleged that medical providers participated in a coordinated billing arrangement involving treatment for people injured in motor vehicle accidents.
According to the insurer, the alleged scheme involved patients receiving initial treatment at medical clinics before being referred to ambulatory surgical centers for orthopedic or pain management evaluations.
The complaint alleged that certain procedures were medically unnecessary and that providers submitted claims to maximize reimbursements available under New York’s no-fault auto insurance rules.
American Transit identified approximately 5,800 individuals who allegedly underwent treatment under what the company characterized as a predetermined fraudulent protocol.
The insurer also alleged that Hostin performed surgeries at external ambulatory surgical facilities and submitted claims through those businesses in exchange for improper compensation, including payments allegedly presented as investment distributions connected to Empire State ASC.
Those accusations formed part of the original complaint and were denied by Hostin’s legal representatives. American Transit subsequently withdrew its claims against him.
The broader litigation was connected to the structure of New York’s no-fault automobile insurance system, which requires insurers to cover eligible accident-related economic losses regardless of which driver caused the collision.
Introduced in 1974, the system covers necessary medical treatment, certain incidental expenses and lost earnings, subject to statutory coverage limits and eligibility requirements.
Under New York State rules, basic personal injury protection provides up to $50,000 per person for covered economic losses, including medical expenses and lost income.
At the time of the original lawsuit, New York City taxis and licensed for-hire vehicles were generally subject to a higher $200,000 personal injury protection requirement. That requirement subsequently changed.
In September 2025, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission adopted amendments reducing the mandatory personal injury protection coverage for taxis, for-hire vehicles, luxury limousines and street-hail liveries from $200,000 to $100,000 per person.
The revised rules implemented Local Law 90 of 2025, which limited the coverage the commission could require to twice the state-level minimum. The $100,000 requirement is reflected in the city’s current taxi and for-hire vehicle insurance regulations.
These insurance requirements are relevant to the broader dispute because the original allegations concerned reimbursements for treatment provided to people injured in commercially insured vehicles.
American Transit maintained in its complaint that the alleged treatment arrangements were designed to generate payments for services that did not meet medical necessity requirements.
Its withdrawal of the claims against Hostin, however, changed the legal position of one of the case’s most publicly recognized defendants.
The insurer stated in July 2025 that it deeply regretted public speculation involving Dr. Hostin, his wife and their children arising from the litigation.
The settlement terms beyond the reported agreement to pay Hostin’s submitted invoices were not publicly detailed in the cited reporting.
The established outcome for Hostin remains the dismissal with prejudice and American Transit’s withdrawal of its allegations against him. The original case also illustrates the scale of litigation surrounding medical reimbursement practices under New York’s no-fault automobile insurance system.
