I Just Got Sued — Is It Too Late to Protect My Assets? For the claim already filed, largely yes — moving assets now is a voidable transfer. For claims that don't exist yet, no. What still works, and what makes it worse.
United States v. Huckaby (2026): What the Case Actually Held. United States v. Huckaby, No. 2:23-cv-00587-DAD-JDP (E.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2026), is a federal collection case in which a self-settled Nevada spendthrift trust failed to protect California real property from a federal judgment lien under 28 U.S.C. §3201(a). The court applied California law to the creditor question — not Nevada’s — because the property sits in California. Under California law the trust was void as a self-settled shield, because the same people were its settlors, trustees, and beneficiaries.
What Critics of the Bridge Trust® Get Wrong. The published critiques attack a trustee-resignation mechanism the Bridge Trust® doesn't use, and cite a case involving a different product. The attack is accurate. The target is wrong.
The best asset protection plans never appear in court records — because they work before litigation begins. Here’s why the absence of case law is actually proof of concept, not a weakness
The Indiana Investors Trust cases are among the most misused in asset protection debates. Here’s what the courts actually decided about asset freezes, offshore planning, and what proper Bridge Trust design prevents
Can a SMLLC be relied upon to contain a liability?
You cannot rely on the Trust document or recitals to establish JURISDICTION! In the end the COURT which has the case in front of it, whether State, Federal or Bankruptcy, will determine which law applies, regardless of what the Trust document itself attempts to establish.
Bankruptcy doesn’t give you a fresh start — it gives a trustee control of your assets and uses them to pay your creditors. Asset protection, built before the threat arrives, keeps your assets in your hands while you negotiate on your terms. This article breaks down the real difference, what the statutes say, and what three landmark cases — Grant, Solow, and Anderson — tell us about how this plays out under real enforcement pressure.
Can I Be Held in Civil Contempt for Having an Offshore Trust? Civil contempt requires a present ability to comply. Courts punish retained control and reactive timing — not offshore trusts. What the record actually shows.
Courts don’t penalize offshore planning — they penalize timing. The client who calls on Friday wanting everything moved offshore by Monday didn’t create the peril by planning. He created it by waiting.