Robert P. Rubicco: Criminal, Liar, Fraud, Daycare Operator – Part XIII ($195K+ Paid in Intuit Payroll Fraud Lawsuit After 10 Years)

Written By: Robert Cox

Robert P. Rubicco: Criminal, Liar, Fraud, Daycare Operator: Table of Contents

NEW ROCHELLE, NY (January 9, 2026) — A Westchester County court entered a default judgment in 2015 against New Rochelle daycare operator Robert P. Rubicco, his wife Christina Rubicco, and their business Anna’s Treehouse, LLC, after Intuit Payroll Services alleged fraud and breach of contract over $85,523.78 in unreimbursed payroll advances that went directly to the couple as the company’s only “employees.” The Rubiccos failed to appear or defend the case, leading to the award of principal, 18% interest, and attorneys’ fees; the full amount—totaling more than $195,825—was satisfied in August 2025 after a decade-long dispute, according to public court records.

The lawsuit was filed in the Supreme Court of New York, Westchester County in 2015, after Anna’s Treehouse failed to reimburse Intuit for funds advanced for payroll deposits due to insufficient funds in the company’s account.

In December 2014, Anna’s Treehouse, a domestic limited liability company based in New Rochelle, New York, enrolled in Intuit’s services. Intuit provides online payroll services to small businesses, including calculating payroll, handling associated tax liabilities, and making electronic payments or filings.

Under the agreement, Anna’s Treehouse was obligated to provide accurate bank account information and maintain sufficient funds in a designated payroll debit account to cover any payroll advances made by Intuit.

Intuit was authorized to withdraw reimbursement from this account prior to or upon making direct deposits.

On December 16 and 17, 2014, Anna’s Treehouse submitted its first payroll requests.

Intuit advanced funds and made direct deposits totaling $85,523.78 to the accounts of the company’s “employees”—who were, in fact, Robert and Christina Rubicco themselves.

Christina Rubicco received four payments: $10,116.64, $7,430.40, $7,430.40, and $7,430.40, totaling $32,407.84.

Robert Rubicco received five payments: $14,155.21, $9,740.18, $9,740.18, $9,740.18, and $9,740.18, totaling $53,115.94.

The designated account had insufficient funds, preventing Intuit from recovering the advanced amounts.

Intuit demanded reimbursement, including a $100 processing fee, but the defendants failed to pay, retaining the funds.

Intuit alleged that the Rubiccos, as owners and managers, knew or should have known about the insufficient funds and made false representations to induce the advances.

The verified complaint, filed on February 19, 2015, asserted four causes of action.

The first was breach of contract against Anna’s Treehouse for failure to maintain sufficient funds and reimburse Intuit, violating the terms of service, with damages of $85,623.78, including the principal plus fee.

The second was money had and received against Anna’s Treehouse for unjust retention of advanced funds, with damages of $85,623.78.

The third was fraud against all defendants for false representations regarding sufficient funds to induce advances, with damages of $85,623.78.

The fourth was attorneys’ fees against all defendants, based on contractual entitlement to reasonable fees for collection efforts.

Intuit also sought 18% per annum interest from December 18, 2014, plus costs and disbursements.

The summons and verified complaint were filed on February 19, 2015.

Service was effected in March 2015: personally on Christina Rubicco on March 9, by substitute service on Robert Rubicco via Christina on March 9, and on Anna’s Treehouse via the Secretary of State on March 3. Affidavits of service confirmed compliance with New York law.

The defendants failed to appear or answer within the required timeframe.

On June 22, 2015, Intuit moved for default judgment, supported by affidavits from Michael Magness, Intuit’s Risk Management Manager, detailing the facts, and from William M. Stein confirming non-military status under the Service Members Civil Relief Act.

Intuit requested $85,623.78 principal, interest, and $21,205 in attorneys’ fees based on a 25% contingency.

On October 15, 2015, Justice Robert DiBella granted the motion unopposed.

Judgment was awarded against Anna’s Treehouse for $85,623.78 plus 18% interest from December 17, 2014, plus $8,500 attorneys’ fees, reduced from the requested amount based on hours expended and reasonableness factors.

Judgment was awarded against Robert Rubicco for $53,115.94.

Judgment was awarded against Christina Rubicco for $32,407.84.

Plus costs and disbursements.

Judgment was entered on November 18, 2015.

In late 2015, Robert Rubicco filed a pro se order to show cause to vacate the judgment, claiming lack of service and notice.

He purported to represent all defendants.

Intuit opposed, providing evidence of service and pre-judgment communications, including emails from Stein warning of impending judgment.

On March 15, 2016, Justice Lewis J. Lubell denied the motion.

Robert Rubicco could not represent the LLC, which required counsel, or his wife, which would be unauthorized practice of law.

His conclusory denial of service was insufficient against affidavits of proper service.

The default judgment stood.

No appeals are documented in the case file.

The matter remained unresolved until 2025, when the defendants fully satisfied the judgment, including accrued interest.

Against Anna’s Treehouse: $108,976.52.

Against Robert Rubicco: $53,780.94.

Against Christina Rubicco: $33,067.84.

A Satisfaction of Judgment was filed on August 20, 2025, acknowledging full payment and authorizing the clerk to mark the docket as satisfied.

No outstanding executions remained.

The lawsuit concluded with Intuit recovering the full amount owed, plus interest and fees, totaling over $195,825.30.

Exhibit 2 (email exchange between Robert Rubicco and Intuit attorney)

This article was drafted with the aid of Grok, an AI tool by xAI, under the direction and editing of Robert Cox to ensure accuracy and adherence to journalistic standards.


Discover more from Talk of the Sound

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply