How can we protect our home from judgement in a liability lawsuit?

My parents own and live in a home in the suburbs. To make a living, they rent a storefront in the inner city and run a business there. It is a small business and they did not have liability insurance as they could not afford the premiums.
Several years ago after a particular heavy snowfall, a man slipped and fell in front of the storefront breaking his leg even though a large clear path free of snow and ice was made by my parents. Our videos show that this person chose to walk on the surrounding snow and ice and not on the path. At the hospital where he was treated, he admitted to having had liquor before the accident. Furthermore, he fell on a Sunday which is off-business hours.
Even with all that, he is suing my parents. My parents have worked 40 years and the only thing they own is their home which is a mixed-use property with commercial and residential units. They bought it three decades before and now it is valued at close to a million dollars. After they were served with court papers, my parents decided to transfer their home to me, their only daughter, in preparation of the worst case scenario: a judgement awarding the plaintiff. Unfortunately the worst case scenario is entirely probable as our lawyer told us the skin tone of the plaintiff will match the skin tone of the jury (the jury is pulled from the denizens of the city and this particular city having experienced white flight is now predominantly one color) while ours will be of a different skin tone. Our lawyer is saying this not because he is racist or cynical, but because he has been handling these types of cases for decades and he has noticed a pattern of judgement to say the least.
I think it is very unfair that this meritless claim (the person was drunk for chrissakes!) will be given consideration by a partial jury and will endanger my parent's life work of savings so I have no problem with my parents trying to protect their only asset. Specifically, my parents went to the county register of deeds and transferred the title of the property to me.

My main question is this: Will doing this transfer of title to kin protect the property from any judicial claims of the plaintiff if they win the judgement? If not, what are other things we can do?

My second questions is: What are the tax ramifications of this move?

shkmiami said: the only thing they own is their home which is a mixed-use property with commercial and residential units ... Specifically, my parents went to the county register of deeds and transferred the title of the property to me ... Will doing this transfer of title to kin protect the property from any judicial claims of the plaintiff if they win the judgementAnd your lawyer recommended this? It is not that simple. Bankruptcy of some type could be simpler.

shkmiami said: My second questions is: What are the tax ramifications of this move?Property taxes will change

xoneinax said: shkmiami said: At the hospital where he was treated, he admitted to having had liquor before the accidentAnd this is written in the medical report?

What exactly does the plaintiff want? Payment for his medical bills; I am guessing MedicAid paid for him, so what is he out?

The plaintiff admitted to hospital staffers that he drank and it is in the medical report.
The plaintiff is suing in civil court reserved for cases over $100,000. He doesn't have a job. So I guess he wants to be compensated for pain and suffering.

xoneinax said: shkmiami said: My second questions is: What are the tax ramifications of this move?Property taxes will change

That sounds scary. I haven't received anything from the county's property assessment dept. yet though. Should I be proactive and contact them or just wait?

shkmiami said: That sounds scary. I haven't received anything from the county's property assessment dept. yet thoughProperty taxes vary drastically from state to sate, but all you probably will get is a bill for whatever property tax is due this coming year.

gatzdon said: I say get a lawyer fast.

Not only would transfering title to a trust probably been smarter,
any transfer of title after the papers were served could open the
door to penalties for willfully hiding assets.

Even sadder it will be if your parents primary residence would have
been protected by some state law, but now has been made fair game
due to the transfer.

I'm not a lawer, I don't know for sure if everything I said is fact
(in fact the answer to OP's question probably varies from state to state).
But I am guessing that by blindly moving million dollar assets around,
one opens the door to losing everything.

Good Luck (and get a lawyer)

Thanks for the advice. I will tell that to my parents.

Your parents should have had the property/home appraised before giving it to you, as it will affect capital gains

I am an insurance company lawyer in Brooklyn. Your lawyer should prepare a motion for summary judgement on liabilty using video and still pictures, weather records, and medical records showing plaintiff was drunk. Your parents may have their business structured in a way that protects their home I.e. a corporation. A lot also depends on what the severity of the injury is, time between snowfall and fall was , local law, etc While the question of whether your parents did a adequate job is one for the jury, the videoay change the issue to assumption of risk because he walked on uncleared area by (drunken) choice. You can transfer assets pre judgement but that area is not my expertise

xoneinax said: shkmiami said: Oh believe me, everybody is being sued. The owner of the building, as well as a business next to my parent's business as they were open at the time of the accidentPlaintiff is filing 3 separate civil suits, each for over 100k?

It is one civil suit with three defendants.

shkmiami said: xoneinax said: shkmiami said: Oh believe me, everybody is being sued. The owner of the building, as well as a business next to my parent's business as they were open at the time of the accidentPlaintiff is filing 3 separate civil suits, each for over 100k?

It is one civil suit with three defendants.

I'm young and naive and don't watch much Judge Judy, but does this guy really have a chance of winning a judgment with the evidence provided?

With an impartial diverse jury, I don't think the plaintiff would have much a chance, but as our lawyer pointed out you never know with a jury that is entirely composed of people who are of the same race as the plaintiff. You have to know this about the city where my parents do business, the majority of people who live there are of one color and the business owners are of another. And one group resents the other for this situation. That's why we don't want to take it to trial.

rpi1967 said: Homesteads are protected in some states from liability judgements that result in bankruptcy. So much depends on your state and therefore yur lawyer's advice is critical.

The reply from Gatzdon says that my parents have lost this Homestead
protection because they transferred the title to me and now the property is fair game. I will take your advice to get a lawyer who knows the state's laws on this matter.

Not saying you should do so, but some people might look into paying someone to have this guy sent on a "permanent vacation." Might not cost all too much more than a lawyer and would be a benefit to society as a whole as well. If that was too expensive, a person might instead check into arranging a little mishap with this fellow's remaining good leg, delivered along with a stern suggestion that he drop the suit.

pennyroyal said: get a lawyer who is the same race as the plantiff to argue your case. might help.

We'll have to change lawyers, but we have thought the same thing.

pennyroyal said: Not saying you should do so, but some people might look into paying someone to have this guy sent on a "permanent vacation." Might not cost all too much more than a lawyer and would be a benefit to society as a whole as well. If that was too expensive, a person might instead check into arranging a little mishap with this fellow's remaining good leg, delivered along with a stern suggestion that he drop the suit.

pennyroyal said: get a lawyer who is the same race as the plantiff to argue your case. might help.

No, this is a bad idea. They need a lawyer that not only specializes in beating lawsuits like that but does not mind going after the scumbags after the win. That typically quickly gets plaintiff lawyers with questionable cases to convince the client to settle for a minimum sum.

shkmiami said: My parents own and live in a home in the suburbs. To make a living, they rent a storefront in the inner city and run a business there. It is a small business and they did not have liability insurance as they could not afford the premiums.

My parents have worked 40 years and the only thing they own is their home which is a mixed-use property with commercial and residential units. They bought it three decades before and now it is valued at close to a million dollars. After they were served with court papers, my parents decided to transfer their home to me, their only daughter, in preparation of the worst case scenario: a judgement awarding the plaintiff. ?

Ha I love it...transfer the asset right after being served, yeah that will work out for you? Where did you guys get such a crazy idea, from other store owners of your ethnic backhround who also own million dollar assets and carry no insurance?

And forgetting insurance for a minute, they couldnt even be bothered to spend a few hundrefd bucks ONE TIME and do some simple asset protection/estate planning LONG BEFORE the lawsuit to protect this million dollar asset? Nice.

This is the definition of penny wise and pound foolish.

Settle with the drunk for a lifetime supply of malt liquor - about $10k and be done with it. It will be cheaper than having your attorney work the trial. Just make sure the malt liquor must be purchased at another store, not your parents, so he doesnt come by again.

OP said above "The plaintiff admitted to hospital staffers that he drank and it is in the medical report."

The following may be a stretch, but if at the hospital blood alcohol tests were done and the number recorded, and it happened to be above the legal limit to drive in OP's state or city (such limits have been slowly dropping in many states; some are as low as 0.08 or maybe lower), it could bolster your case. Of course most localities do not have "too drunk to walk" laws, but if it could be proven that the plaintiff was at least as drunk as the alcohol level required to get a DUI or DWI in your state, that could be worth something - at least, a partial counterbalance against the potential of a biased jury as described so eloquently (and, I fear, realistically) above. The concept of "too drunk to walk" shouldn't be hard for even the simplest lawyer to present to any jury, if it comes to that.

But, lets hope it doesn't get that far.

beethovengirl said: pennyroyal said: Not saying you should do so, but some people might look into paying someone to have this guy sent on a "permanent vacation." Might not cost all too much more than a lawyer and would be a benefit to society as a whole as well. If that was too expensive, a person might instead check into arranging a little mishap with this fellow's remaining good leg, delivered along with a stern suggestion that he drop the suit.
I can't believe such incitement to violence (which may not even be constitutionally protected speech) got green. Or maybe I shouldn't be."Constitutionally protected speech"? This is the Internet, remember? Nobody knows who anyone is. We could all be dogs like in that famous New Yorker cartoon, for all anybody knows...

Any resolution?