Cideous Posted August 23, 2018 Share Posted August 23, 2018 Scenario: If you live in one state with personal property protections (house, IRA protections etc from creditors like Nevada or Texas) and you work in another (without protections like CA) and get sued in the state without the protections (but you have Zero assets there). Does anyone have any idea if the people who sue you can go after your assets in the state you live and reside in? I know....ask a lawyer, but with work and travel across state lines becoming more and more common in our profession, I was wondering if anyone has researched this. As I inch closer to retiring, I was wondering if working across state lines would be an option (limited part-time), but this one fact...liability, keeps me up at night. Thanks for any thoughts, insight or experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator ventana Posted August 23, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 23, 2018 should be moot this is what med mal insurance is for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cideous Posted August 23, 2018 Author Share Posted August 23, 2018 1 hour ago, ventana said: should be moot this is what med mal insurance is for Except it's not. Providers are frequently sued for more then medmal covers. There are pages of horror stories of lawyers going after doc's houses in CA because they have exceeded their medmal limits. My original question stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpackelly Posted August 23, 2018 Share Posted August 23, 2018 Sorry about this concern. I don’t think this is bright line law, but decided on a one by one basis. Lawyers can go after anything, but whether they prevail or not is the concern. Even if they prevail, can it be enforced? This would be difficult to even research legally. A very interesting legal question though. I would throw my money on the state where you had your property. Say you were sued in Michigan, where your house is not protected, but your house was in Florida, where it is. I think eventually you would be keeping your house, but I have no precedent to cite. BTW, almost every state protects retirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator ventana Posted August 24, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 24, 2018 Having been in insurance world prior to PA But not in CA In order to get a signed release for the med mal settlement - they require a release of all claims VERY rare that someone would not sign off on the million dollar payout on the outside chance that they might get a little more from a PA But no sure in CA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cideous Posted August 24, 2018 Author Share Posted August 24, 2018 Good point ^^^ There would be something to be said for living on the border of say NV and working in CA or any other border states to protect assets. On retirement, there was an article a while back that said CA was letting lawyers go after IRA's now in lawsuits. 401k still safe, but not IRA's. http://www.latimes.com/la-ira-story3-story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpackelly Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 I can think of one instance. OJ was sued civilly in Cali, as you recall he lost that multimillion verdict, but he did get to keep his house in Florida because Florida protects houses that ar first residency of any value from suit or bankruptcy. So maybe Nevada is a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cideous Posted August 25, 2018 Author Share Posted August 25, 2018 ^^^ Good point lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.