Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What's the term for when you try to shelter your assets, because you think you're about to be sued, by either gifting it to a relative or starting an LLC. The judge can rule in favor of the plaintiff if it's obvious you were trying to hide your assets.
"Fraudulent Conveyance" is when you transfer assets to another entity for the purpose of avoiding a current or potential judgement against that asset.
"Asset Protection Trust" is when you establish a trust and place assets into it that becomes theoretically judgement proof after conforming to specific regulations.
What's the term for when you try to shelter your assets, because you think you're about to be sued, by either gifting it to a relative or starting an LLC. The judge can rule in favor of the plaintiff if it's obvious you were trying to hide your assets.
No, he can't. The case will be adjudicated on it's own merits. Hiding assets is a separate issue.
Basically if he moves his assets before he's sued, it's one thing. But once the letters from lawyers start flying it's something else entirely.
I'm not saying he won't get in trouble over it, I'm saying it doesn't change the outcome of the base complaint. If he's sued for breach of contract, the judgment will be based on the evidence that shows he breached the contract or not. The judge is not going to summarily rule that he breached the contract even if all the evidence says he did not, simply because he tried to hide assets.
A legal complaint will likely be served with a restraining order blocking him from moving assets so doing so will be a violation of the restraining order.
I'm not saying he won't get in trouble over it, I'm saying it doesn't change the outcome of the base complaint. If he's sued for breach of contract, the judgment will be based on the evidence that shows he breached the contract or not. The judge is not going to summarily rule that he breached the contract even if all the evidence says he did not, simply because he tried to hide assets.
A legal complaint will likely be served with a restraining order blocking him from moving assets so doing so will be a violation of the restraining order.
The court can look at assets retroactively. It's done all the time in bankruptcy cases to check that you didn't go on a reckless spending spree just before filing BK. You can't just get new credit cards, buy a bunch of high end furniture and electronics, go on elaborate vacations, then file BK. Well, you can, but the court is not going to let you include those purchases in the BK.
The court can look at assets retroactively. It's done all the time in bankruptcy cases to check that you didn't go on a reckless spending spree just before filing BK. You can't just get new credit cards, buy a bunch of high end furniture and electronics, go on elaborate vacations, then file BK. Well, you can, but the court is not going to let you include those purchases in the BK.
Sure, but the OP mentioned possibly being sued by someone, not a BK. I guess it would depend on what the case was about.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
