COVID-19 is having a serious impact on our community and around the world. We understand that there are uncertainties right now.
But we want to reassure you that Davis Schilken, PC is still up and running and we are dedicated to supporting our clients, employees, and community. Please call us if you need help at 303-670-9855, we are able to set up either video conference or conference calls to address and handle your legal needs.
Be well and stay safe!

Call Us: (303) 670-9855

1658 Cole Blvd., Building 6, Suite 200, Lakewood, CO 80401
7887 E. Belleview Ave, Suite 820, Denver, CO 80111

Call Us: (303) 670-9855

1658 Cole Blvd.,Building 6, Suite 200
Lakewood, CO 80401
7887 E. Belleview Ave, Suite 820,
Denver, CO 80111

Select Page

June 8, 2017

In the bankruptcy case of In re Cleveland, a debtor found just how non-protective a limited liability company (LLC) one-member can be in the face of creditors. The court ruled that such an LLC provides absolutely no protection from the LLC-owner’s creditors.

By way of some background on LLCs and asset protection, the general rule has been that when a member in an LLC encounters a creditor problem, the creditor is held at bay with regard to any attempt to seize or to attach any assets in that LLC in satisfaction of the creditor’s claims against the debtor-member. The creditor instead may be able to only obtain a “charging order” against the LLC interest (meaning that the creditor would receive LLC assets in satisfaction of the creditor’s judgment only at the time and to the extent that a distribution is been made from the LLC to that debtor). The debtor-member, as manager of that LLC, typically controls when any such distributions are made. This can be very frustrating to the creditor.

However, a general trend has been developing that allows (when an LLC has only one owner) the creditor in a federal bankruptcy setting can have unfettered access to the LLC assets. The owner of the LLC may not be shielded by any charging order limitation to which the creditor would otherwise be subject, notwithstanding that the applicable state law (Nevada) specifies that charging order is the exclusive remedy. Federal bankruptcy law pre-empts the state law protection.

Cite: In re Cleveland, 2014 WL 4809924 (D. Nev. Sept. 29, 2014).

By: Edward D. Brown, Esq., CPA, LLM

Check out Ed’s latest blog, “Domestic Asset Protection Trust Not Obligated to Pay Spouse’s Alimony and Child Support”