Expanding the Definition of Malpractice (and the need for Asset Protection)

Recently the Texas Supreme Court ruled that a death caused by a spider bite is the proper subject of a medical malpractice lawsuit.  It seems that courts are getting carried away (even more than usual), which is why any complete asset protection plan includes an offshore trust component.  This is especially important if your are a physician, dentist, or chiropractor, since those professions are high priority targets for plaintiff attorneys, especially if you carry malpractice insurance versus “going bare.”

Texas Spider Bite Lawsuit Case

In the Texas case referenced above, the plaintiff was a patient at the Omaha Health Care Center.  While in the facility, the plaintiff was bitten by a brown recluse spider and eventually died.  Keep in mind that the patient was not admitted because of the spider bite.  Rather, she was bitten while in residence at the healthcare facility.  The bite happened independent of the treatment and care she was receiving.

Nonetheless, the Texas Supreme Court held that the bite and resulting death could permissibly be prosecuted as a medical malpractice claim.  Oddly, the judge who wrote the opinion suggested that the failure to inspect the premises for pests constituted medical malpractice.  Seems to us that it should have been a pest control malpractice claim, but once again, reason often diverges from reality when one enter the halls of justice.

Asset Protection for Doctors and Other Professionals

Texas has done a relatively good job of protecting doctors, but Texas asset protection laws are far from adequate.  Other states (think Florida, California, New York, New Jersey, etc.) have far fewer protections in place.  If you are professional, then you need asset protection, and you need asset protection with an offshore component.

The reason that offshore trusts are important is that they give you the option to send assets to an offshore jurisdiction if you ever get sued.  Assets that remain in the United States and under your sole control are subject to the mandates of judges.  That means that if your assets are located here in the U.S., a judge can order you to turn them over to a creditor (i.e. anyone who has a claim against you, whether a plaintiff or a banker).  Allowing anyone to hold that kind of power over you is risky.

The benefits of planning to protect your assets far outweigh the costs, because once a claim exists against you, it’s too late because of fraudulent transfer laws.  And once your plan is in place, you still control your assets.  In fact, you have greater control of your assets, because you have the ability to place them beyond the reach of the judicial system without interference by a judge.