Case Law - Asset Protection-The Privacy & Financial Shield LLC

Every asset protection planner worth his salt constantly reads asset protection related court cases. Unfortunately, most asset protection planners fail to do so and thus should be avoided. A good way to weed out bad asset protection planners is to ask them what they think about some of the more prominent cases, such as In re: Ehmann, In re: Ashley Albright, Strangi v. CIR, or the infamous “Anderson” case (all of which you can link to below). Furthermore, reading these cases yourself will hone your “BS detector” so you can more easily identify which strategies have merit and which ones stink to high heaven.

Note that you’ll see a lot more cases where asset protection fails than succeeds. This doesn’t mean asset protection doesn’t work. Rather, this phenomenon occurs for the following reasons:

The best asset protection programs are not even suspected of being asset protection, and are thus often not challenged.
The best asset protection programs have no ‘chinks in the armor’ that a creditor might attack, and therefore they are seldom challenged.
If someone has a good asset protection program, the plaintiff’s attorney may be more likely to seek an out-of-court settlement (which will be much more favorable to the defendant than if he had no asset protection, by the way) than going through a costly trial that, even if he wins, will result in a judgment he’ll have great difficulty collecting on, if he can collect at all. Thus, good asset protection helps prevent a case from going to trial. Sometimes it prevents litigation from arising in the first place!

Reading court cases helps a planner understand the fine nuances of high-level asset protection planning, as well as stay abreast of the latest legal developments. It’s one of the most important things PF Shield does in order to provide you with the most cutting-edge, up-to-date, state-of-the-art strategies available!