Doctors Report Losing Personal Assets in Lawsuits

A new survey finds that approximately twenty percent of the nation's medical doctors have either lost personal assets in civil litigation or personally know a colleague who has. While some trial lawyer associations continue to claim, "There's absolutely no proof from any source that any physician's assets are being seized post-judgment," the findings of this survey directly contradict those assertions.

Provo, UT July 8, 2004 -- A new survey finds that approximately twenty percent of the nation's medical doctors have either lost personal assets in civil litigation or personally know a colleague who has.

While some trial lawyer associations continue to claim, "There's absolutely no proof from any source that any physicians assets are being seized post-judgment," the findings of this survey directly contradict those assertions (Quote originating from Illinois Trial Lawyers Association president, Michael Schostok, as published in The Quad City Times; Illinois Medical Malpractice Reform Still in Flux by Mark Samuels; June 20, 2004).

The survey was sent to over 600 practicing physicians and surgeons nationwide in an attempt to gauge asset protection practices among today's doctors. Additional findings from the survey suggest almost thirty percent of doctors title their homes to family members for lawsuit protection while almost a quarter of doctors title their homes to specialized legal entities such as trusts or limited partnerships for the same reason.

"Doctors losing personal assets to lawsuits is a disastrous trend for this country's health care," says Cameron Taylor, Executive Director for the National Medical Foundation for Asset Protection. "But surprisingly, there are very few organizations attempting to measure how often this happens."

Three factors make this phenomenon especially difficult to substantiate. First, many doctors are reluctant to publicly admit losing personal assets to lawsuits for fear of their professional reputations. Second, whether insurance policies or personal assets are used to satisfy judgments are not publicly available for research. Third, the percentage of doctors who actually lose assets to lawsuits is presumably small. If only twenty percent of doctors personally know someone who has lost personal assets, its actual occurrence is reasonably much lower.    

Taylor, who regularly speaks with doctors who have experienced asset loss in his capacity at the foundation, hopes this study will inspire others to conduct similar investigations on the subject.

In all 50 states, it is legal for civil courts to seize personal assets to pay judgments leveled against a professional. However, different states offer varying protection for different assets. For example, homestead exemption laws in six states preclude a doctors primary residence from being seized to satisfy judgments. Other states protect equity in life insurance policies and all states protect qualified retirement plans.

Jay W. Mitton, MBA, JD, widely regarded as "The Father of Asset Protection" and chairman of the foundation, notes that "the field of asset protection continues to swell in popularity among doctors. The 'double whammy' of multimillion - dollar jury awards and double digit malpractice premium increases has left medical professionals with few other options but to structure their most valuable assets from being made vulnerable to these financial predators."

For further questions about the survey or The National Medical Foundation for Asset Protection, contact Spencer Sessions, Public and Media Relations, at 1-800-375-2453. www.nationalmedicalfoundation.org

# # #