Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 I couldn't access it. I tried but must have done something wrong. Perhaps others had the same problem. Rian Mintek MD Allegan, MI PS Mine is a PLLC (professional LLC) Practice Types I thought this poll would automatically send out the results when it closed over the weekend, but it didn't. Below is a graphic of the final results. Not a very good showing (31 of 342 members responded), but interesting nonetheless. Locke, MD No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.6/340 - Release Date: 05/15/2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 I couldn't access it. I tried but must have done something wrong. Perhaps others had the same problem. Rian Mintek MD Allegan, MI PS Mine is a PLLC (professional LLC) Practice Types I thought this poll would automatically send out the results when it closed over the weekend, but it didn't. Below is a graphic of the final results. Not a very good showing (31 of 342 members responded), but interesting nonetheless. Locke, MD No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.6/340 - Release Date: 05/15/2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, unless you want to risk everything you own. Practice Types I thought this poll would automatically send out the results when it closed over the weekend, but it didn't. Below is a graphic of the final results. Not a very good showing (31 of 342 members responded), but interesting nonetheless. Locke, MD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state to state? Greg Brock DO wrote: > As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as > “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good > health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, > unless you want to risk everything you own. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 I'm not sure, but the rules may vary state to state. In a book I have called " The Doctor's Wealth Preservation Guide " by Roccy DefRancesco, JD (health care attorney) he says: " sole proprietorships are the second worst way to own or run a business behind a partnership. With a sole proprietorship there are no barriers between the business done and the individual running/owning the business . . .. If a sole proprietor acting on behalf of his business commits negligence in his duties for the business that causes injury to a third person, the sole proprietor is personally liable for any and all injuries to that third person . . . if an employee of the business harms a third person when acting within the scope of his/her employment, the sole proprietor is personally liable for the injury . . . if someone is harmed on the business premises (say for a slip and fall injury), the sole proprietor is personally liable for the injury . . . all of the sole proprietor's personal and business assets are subjects to claims by the creditors (the people who sued the sole proprietor's business). I'll make this short-don't ever be a sole proprietorship. " And this author is an experienced health care attorney. This book is recently published & he makes no mention of state to state variations. Re: Practice Types I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state to state? Greg Brock DO wrote: > As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as > " sole proprietor " are either mistaken or have checked with a good > health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, > unless you want to risk everything you own. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! Sharon At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state to state? Greg Brock DO wrote: > As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as > “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good > health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, > unless you want to risk everything you own. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 Was that a recent FPM article? I’d like to search for it on their website to see if they are really advising a sole proprietorship. Everything I’ve ever read says absolutely no way should you ever operate as a sole proprietor (ian ANY business, not just medicine). The way I understood it is that you are personally liable regardless of whether you have liability coverage or not (policy limits may not matter). You basically have no shield between you & the practice in a sole proprietorship, they are one & the same. Re: Practice Types The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! Sharon At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state to state? Greg Brock DO wrote: > As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as > “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good > health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, > unless you want to risk everything you own. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 Was that a recent FPM article? I’d like to search for it on their website to see if they are really advising a sole proprietorship. Everything I’ve ever read says absolutely no way should you ever operate as a sole proprietor (ian ANY business, not just medicine). The way I understood it is that you are personally liable regardless of whether you have liability coverage or not (policy limits may not matter). You basically have no shield between you & the practice in a sole proprietorship, they are one & the same. Re: Practice Types The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! Sharon At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state to state? Greg Brock DO wrote: > As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as > “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good > health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, > unless you want to risk everything you own. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 Here's the FPM link: http://www.aafp.org/fpm/20051100/42choo.pdf Whew! I feel validated. Greg Brock DO wrote: > Was that a recent FPM article? I’d like to search for it on their > website to see if they are really advising a sole proprietorship. > Everything I’ve ever read says absolutely no way should you ever > operate as a sole proprietor (ian ANY business, not just medicine). > The way I understood it is that you are personally liable regardless > of whether you have liability coverage or not (policy limits may not > matter). You basically have no shield between you & the practice in a > sole proprietorship, they are one & the same. > > > > * Re: Practice Types > > The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic > concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole > proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of > course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as > practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk > in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits > (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I > believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my > sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, > may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! > > Sharon > > At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: > > I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. > But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when > setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant > about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take > the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told > that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully > argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is > the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably > wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to > be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state > to state? > > Greg > > > Brock DO wrote: > >> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as >> “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good >> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, >> unless you want to risk everything you own. >> >> >> > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 Here's the FPM link: http://www.aafp.org/fpm/20051100/42choo.pdf Whew! I feel validated. Greg Brock DO wrote: > Was that a recent FPM article? I’d like to search for it on their > website to see if they are really advising a sole proprietorship. > Everything I’ve ever read says absolutely no way should you ever > operate as a sole proprietor (ian ANY business, not just medicine). > The way I understood it is that you are personally liable regardless > of whether you have liability coverage or not (policy limits may not > matter). You basically have no shield between you & the practice in a > sole proprietorship, they are one & the same. > > > > * Re: Practice Types > > The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic > concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole > proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of > course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as > practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk > in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits > (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I > believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my > sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, > may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! > > Sharon > > At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: > > I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. > But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when > setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant > about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take > the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told > that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully > argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is > the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably > wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to > be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state > to state? > > Greg > > > Brock DO wrote: > >> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as >> “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good >> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, >> unless you want to risk everything you own. >> >> >> > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 RE LLC vs Corp Still like my LLC setup, but then, I still don't have any net income--> close though, at 18 months, covering expenses and happy to be self employed. Dr Matt Levin In practice since 1988 employed from 1988 through end 2004 Solo since Dec 2004 Pittsburgh, PA * Re: Practice Types >> >> The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic >> concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole >> proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of >> course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as >> practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk >> in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits >> (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I >> believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my >> sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, >> may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! >> >> Sharon >> >> At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: >> >> I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. >> But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when >> setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant >> about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take >> the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told >> that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully >> argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is >> the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably >> wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to >> be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state >> to state? >> >> Greg >> >> >> Brock DO wrote: >> >>> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as >>> “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good >>> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, >>> unless you want to risk everything you own. >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 RE LLC vs Corp Still like my LLC setup, but then, I still don't have any net income--> close though, at 18 months, covering expenses and happy to be self employed. Dr Matt Levin In practice since 1988 employed from 1988 through end 2004 Solo since Dec 2004 Pittsburgh, PA * Re: Practice Types >> >> The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic >> concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole >> proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of >> course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as >> practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk >> in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits >> (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I >> believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my >> sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, >> may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! >> >> Sharon >> >> At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: >> >> I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. >> But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when >> setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant >> about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take >> the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told >> that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully >> argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is >> the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably >> wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to >> be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state >> to state? >> >> Greg >> >> >> Brock DO wrote: >> >>> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as >>> “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good >>> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, >>> unless you want to risk everything you own. >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 Here's what the article below says...Choose wiselyPhysicians have a variety of entity choices for their practices with several distinctions to remember. Each practice situation is unique, and a physician or group should consult with a qualified attorney and accountant before making the decision. Although I usually recommend an S corporation for a new group and a sole proprietorship for a physician who does not anticipate practicing with another physician, take the time to evaluate the pros and cons of each type of entity. You will find the one that’s right for you. Still, it would seem that the Corp is still a good choice even for the solo doc. See Below. Locke * Re: Practice Types>> The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic> concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole> proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of> course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as> practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk> in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits> (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I> believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my> sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said,> may none of us ever be involved in any such suits!>> Sharon >> At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote:>> I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages.> But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when> setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant> about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take> the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told> that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully> argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is> the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably> wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to> be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state> to state?>> Greg>>> Brock DO wrote:>>> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as>> “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good>> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no,>> unless you want to risk everything you own.>>>> >>>>>>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 Here's what the article below says...Choose wiselyPhysicians have a variety of entity choices for their practices with several distinctions to remember. Each practice situation is unique, and a physician or group should consult with a qualified attorney and accountant before making the decision. Although I usually recommend an S corporation for a new group and a sole proprietorship for a physician who does not anticipate practicing with another physician, take the time to evaluate the pros and cons of each type of entity. You will find the one that’s right for you. Still, it would seem that the Corp is still a good choice even for the solo doc. See Below. Locke * Re: Practice Types>> The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic> concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole> proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of> course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as> practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk> in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits> (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I> believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my> sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said,> may none of us ever be involved in any such suits!>> Sharon >> At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote:>> I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages.> But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when> setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant> about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take> the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told> that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully> argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is> the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably> wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to> be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state> to state?>> Greg>>> Brock DO wrote:>>> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as>> “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good>> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no,>> unless you want to risk everything you own.>>>> >>>>>>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 I hear that you can get insurance to protect your personal assets. I guess one should weigh the costs of the extra insurance vs. the costs of the corp structure, annual fees, taxes etc. Moitri Brock DO wrote: Was that a recent FPM article? I’d like to search for it on their website to see if they are really advising a sole proprietorship. Everything I’ve ever read says absolutely no way should you ever operate as a sole proprietor (ian ANY business, not just medicine). The way I understood it is that you are personally liable regardless of whether you have liability coverage or not (policy limits may not matter). You basically have no shield between you & the practice in a sole proprietorship, they are one & the same. -----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Sharon McCoy Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 3:10 PMTo: Subject: Re: Practice Types The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, may none of us ever be involved in any such suits!Sharon At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state to state?Greg Brock DO wrote:> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as > “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good > health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, > unless you want to risk everything you own.>> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 I see that the author did seem to recommend a sole proprietorship in the last paragraph. Since this seemed like the opposite of what the book I have advises, I decided to e-mail the book's author to ask his thoughts. Here is my e-mail to him & his reply: My question to him: " Hello. I have your book " The Doctor's Wealth Preservation Guide. " In it you say to never become a sole proprietorship. Yet a recent article in Family Practice Management, written by a health care attorney, actually recommends a sole proprietorship as the preferred entity type for solo docs. Why the seemingly polar opposite advise? See the final paragraph of the following article link. " Brock, D.O. solo family medicine London, Ohio His reply: Dr. Brock, Thank you for forwarding that article: Choosing the right practice entity. It makes my skin crawl that an ignorant attorney like the one who wrote that article has such articles published. I don't blame the publisher because they are relying on the expertise of the author. NO ONE should ever be a sole prop. (as he recommends in the last paragraph). The simply reason is that if someone comes onto the grounds and slips and falls or gets hurt by one of the employees or all the other types of traditional liabilities that go along with running a business where the public comes to visit gets hurt, the doctor will be sued PERSONALLY. If the doctor is a P.C., S-, C-, or LLC, that slip and fall case or sexual harassment case by the employee will only put at risk the assets of the company NOT the doctor's personal assets (unless he/she is the one doing the sexual harassing). Additionally, there are tax reasons to be treated as an S- or C- corporation. NEVER EVER be a sole prop. What a terrible article giving terrible advice for solo doctors. Thanks again. " As can be seen, he is pretty adamant about not being a sole proprietorship. Obviously, the attorneys have differing opinions on this but Mr. DeFranceso sounds more convinced in his view than the FPM author does. By the way, I have no financial interest in Mr. DeFranceso's book, services, etc & have never talked to him. My only knowledge of him is the book of his that I've read on doctor asset protection/wealth preservation (he gives his e-mail address in the book, for questions). Boy, if I were running my office as a sole proprietorship I sure think I would be making a change, but that is just me. I am glad I'm an LLC & that option is available here in Ohio. * Re: Practice Types > > The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic > concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole > proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of > course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as > practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk > in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits > (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I > believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my > sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, > may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! > > Sharon > > At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: > > I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. > But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when > setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant > about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take > the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told > that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully > argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is > the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably > wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to > be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state > to state? > > Greg > > > Brock DO wrote: > >> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as >> " sole proprietor " are either mistaken or have checked with a good >> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, >> unless you want to risk everything you own. >> >> >> > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 I see that the author did seem to recommend a sole proprietorship in the last paragraph. Since this seemed like the opposite of what the book I have advises, I decided to e-mail the book's author to ask his thoughts. Here is my e-mail to him & his reply: My question to him: " Hello. I have your book " The Doctor's Wealth Preservation Guide. " In it you say to never become a sole proprietorship. Yet a recent article in Family Practice Management, written by a health care attorney, actually recommends a sole proprietorship as the preferred entity type for solo docs. Why the seemingly polar opposite advise? See the final paragraph of the following article link. " Brock, D.O. solo family medicine London, Ohio His reply: Dr. Brock, Thank you for forwarding that article: Choosing the right practice entity. It makes my skin crawl that an ignorant attorney like the one who wrote that article has such articles published. I don't blame the publisher because they are relying on the expertise of the author. NO ONE should ever be a sole prop. (as he recommends in the last paragraph). The simply reason is that if someone comes onto the grounds and slips and falls or gets hurt by one of the employees or all the other types of traditional liabilities that go along with running a business where the public comes to visit gets hurt, the doctor will be sued PERSONALLY. If the doctor is a P.C., S-, C-, or LLC, that slip and fall case or sexual harassment case by the employee will only put at risk the assets of the company NOT the doctor's personal assets (unless he/she is the one doing the sexual harassing). Additionally, there are tax reasons to be treated as an S- or C- corporation. NEVER EVER be a sole prop. What a terrible article giving terrible advice for solo doctors. Thanks again. " As can be seen, he is pretty adamant about not being a sole proprietorship. Obviously, the attorneys have differing opinions on this but Mr. DeFranceso sounds more convinced in his view than the FPM author does. By the way, I have no financial interest in Mr. DeFranceso's book, services, etc & have never talked to him. My only knowledge of him is the book of his that I've read on doctor asset protection/wealth preservation (he gives his e-mail address in the book, for questions). Boy, if I were running my office as a sole proprietorship I sure think I would be making a change, but that is just me. I am glad I'm an LLC & that option is available here in Ohio. * Re: Practice Types > > The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic > concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole > proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of > course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as > practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk > in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits > (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I > believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my > sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, > may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! > > Sharon > > At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: > > I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. > But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when > setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant > about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take > the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told > that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully > argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is > the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably > wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to > be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state > to state? > > Greg > > > Brock DO wrote: > >> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as >> " sole proprietor " are either mistaken or have checked with a good >> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, >> unless you want to risk everything you own. >> >> >> > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 Keeping the debate open, I emailed the attorney-author of the FPM article. Here is his reply: I am not an "ignorant" attorney, just a practical one. A sole proprietorship is a way to save a doctor money on setting up and maintaining a separate entity. Slip and fall cases against a doctor are extremely rare and are typically covered by insurance. In addition, in a sexual harassment case, the doctor could not hide behind the entity to avoid personal liability. ____________________________________________ B. Sansweet, Esquire Kalogredis, Sansweet, Dearden and Burke, Ltd. 987 Old Eagle School Road, Suite 704 Wayne, PA 19087 phone ext. 202 fax email: jsansweet@... Brock DO wrote: I see that the author did seem to recommend a sole proprietorship in the last paragraph. Since this seemed like the opposite of what the book I have advises, I decided to e-mail the book's author to ask his thoughts. Here is my e-mail to him & his reply: My question to him: "Hello. I have your book "The Doctor's Wealth Preservation Guide." In it you say to never become a sole proprietorship. Yet a recent article in Family Practice Management, written by a health care attorney, actually recommends a sole proprietorship as the preferred entity type for solo docs. Why the seemingly polar opposite advise? See the final paragraph of the following article link." Brock, D.O. solo family medicine London, Ohio His reply: Dr. Brock, Thank you for forwarding that article: Choosing the right practice entity. It makes my skin crawl that an ignorant attorney like the one who wrote that article has such articles published. I don't blame the publisher because they are relying on the expertise of the author. NO ONE should ever be a sole prop. (as he recommends in the last paragraph). The simply reason is that if someone comes onto the grounds and slips and falls or gets hurt by one of the employees or all the other types of traditional liabilities that go along with running a business where the public comes to visit gets hurt, the doctor will be sued PERSONALLY. If the doctor is a P.C., S-, C-, or LLC, that slip and fall case or sexual harassment case by the employee will only put at risk the assets of the company NOT the doctor's personal assets (unless he/she is the one doing the sexual harassing). Additionally, there are tax reasons to be treated as an S- or C- corporation. NEVER EVER be a sole prop. What a terrible article giving terrible advice for solo doctors. Thanks again." As can be seen, he is pretty adamant about not being a sole proprietorship. Obviously, the attorneys have differing opinions on this but Mr. DeFranceso sounds more convinced in his view than the FPM author does. By the way, I have no financial interest in Mr. DeFranceso's book, services, etc & have never talked to him. My only knowledge of him is the book of his that I've read on doctor asset protection/wealth preservation (he gives his e-mail address in the book, for questions). Boy, if I were running my office as a sole proprietorship I sure think I would be making a change, but that is just me. I am glad I'm an LLC & that option is available here in Ohio. * Re: Practice Types > > The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic > concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole > proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of > course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as > practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk > in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits > (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I > believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my > sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, > may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! > > Sharon > > At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: > > I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. > But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when > setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant > about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take > the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told > that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully > argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is > the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably > wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to > be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state > to state? > > Greg > > > Brock DO wrote: > >> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as >> "sole proprietor" are either mistaken or have checked with a good >> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, >> unless you want to risk everything you own. >> >> >> > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 Keeping the debate open, I emailed the attorney-author of the FPM article. Here is his reply: I am not an "ignorant" attorney, just a practical one. A sole proprietorship is a way to save a doctor money on setting up and maintaining a separate entity. Slip and fall cases against a doctor are extremely rare and are typically covered by insurance. In addition, in a sexual harassment case, the doctor could not hide behind the entity to avoid personal liability. ____________________________________________ B. Sansweet, Esquire Kalogredis, Sansweet, Dearden and Burke, Ltd. 987 Old Eagle School Road, Suite 704 Wayne, PA 19087 phone ext. 202 fax email: jsansweet@... Brock DO wrote: I see that the author did seem to recommend a sole proprietorship in the last paragraph. Since this seemed like the opposite of what the book I have advises, I decided to e-mail the book's author to ask his thoughts. Here is my e-mail to him & his reply: My question to him: "Hello. I have your book "The Doctor's Wealth Preservation Guide." In it you say to never become a sole proprietorship. Yet a recent article in Family Practice Management, written by a health care attorney, actually recommends a sole proprietorship as the preferred entity type for solo docs. Why the seemingly polar opposite advise? See the final paragraph of the following article link." Brock, D.O. solo family medicine London, Ohio His reply: Dr. Brock, Thank you for forwarding that article: Choosing the right practice entity. It makes my skin crawl that an ignorant attorney like the one who wrote that article has such articles published. I don't blame the publisher because they are relying on the expertise of the author. NO ONE should ever be a sole prop. (as he recommends in the last paragraph). The simply reason is that if someone comes onto the grounds and slips and falls or gets hurt by one of the employees or all the other types of traditional liabilities that go along with running a business where the public comes to visit gets hurt, the doctor will be sued PERSONALLY. If the doctor is a P.C., S-, C-, or LLC, that slip and fall case or sexual harassment case by the employee will only put at risk the assets of the company NOT the doctor's personal assets (unless he/she is the one doing the sexual harassing). Additionally, there are tax reasons to be treated as an S- or C- corporation. NEVER EVER be a sole prop. What a terrible article giving terrible advice for solo doctors. Thanks again." As can be seen, he is pretty adamant about not being a sole proprietorship. Obviously, the attorneys have differing opinions on this but Mr. DeFranceso sounds more convinced in his view than the FPM author does. By the way, I have no financial interest in Mr. DeFranceso's book, services, etc & have never talked to him. My only knowledge of him is the book of his that I've read on doctor asset protection/wealth preservation (he gives his e-mail address in the book, for questions). Boy, if I were running my office as a sole proprietorship I sure think I would be making a change, but that is just me. I am glad I'm an LLC & that option is available here in Ohio. * Re: Practice Types > > The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic > concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole > proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of > course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as > practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk > in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits > (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I > believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my > sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, > may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! > > Sharon > > At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: > > I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. > But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when > setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant > about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take > the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told > that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully > argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is > the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably > wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to > be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state > to state? > > Greg > > > Brock DO wrote: > >> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as >> "sole proprietor" are either mistaken or have checked with a good >> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, >> unless you want to risk everything you own. >> >> >> > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 That is why I am glad I had LLC as an option here in Ohio . . . best of practicality AND reasonable entity protection of personal liability. Still, just like in malpractice cases, our policies have upper limits & you are open to any judgement above that in a sole prop. setup. -----Original Message----- From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Greg & Amy Hinson Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 11:53 AM To: Subject: Re: Practice Types Keeping the debate open, I emailed the attorney-author of the FPM article. Here is his reply: I am not an " ignorant " attorney, just a practical one. A soleproprietorship is a way to save a doctor money on setting up and maintaininga separate entity. Slip and fall cases against a doctor are extremely rareand are typically covered by insurance. In addition, in a sexual harassmentcase, the doctor could not hide behind the entity to avoid personalliability. ____________________________________________ B. Sansweet, EsquireKalogredis, Sansweet, Dearden and Burke, Ltd.987 Old Eagle School Road, Suite 704Wayne, PA 19087phone ext. 202fax email: jsansweet@... Brock DO wrote: I see that the author did seem to recommend a sole proprietorship in the last paragraph. Since this seemed like the opposite of what the book I have advises, I decided to e-mail the book's author to ask his thoughts. Here is my e-mail to him & his reply: My question to him: " Hello. I have your book " The Doctor's Wealth Preservation Guide. " In it you say to never become a sole proprietorship. Yet a recent article in Family Practice Management, written by a health care attorney, actually recommends a sole proprietorship as the preferred entity type for solo docs. Why the seemingly polar opposite advise? See the final paragraph of the following article link. " Brock, D.O. solo family medicine London, Ohio His reply: Dr. Brock, Thank you for forwarding that article: Choosing the right practice entity. It makes my skin crawl that an ignorant attorney like the one who wrote that article has such articles published. I don't blame the publisher because they are relying on the expertise of the author. NO ONE should ever be a sole prop. (as he recommends in the last paragraph). The simply reason is that if someone comes onto the grounds and slips and falls or gets hurt by one of the employees or all the other types of traditional liabilities that go along with running a business where the public comes to visit gets hurt, the doctor will be sued PERSONALLY. If the doctor is a P.C., S-, C-, or LLC, that slip and fall case or sexual harassment case by the employee will only put at risk the assets of the company NOT the doctor's personal assets (unless he/she is the one doing the sexual harassing). Additionally, there are tax reasons to be treated as an S- or C- corporation. NEVER EVER be a sole prop. What a terrible article giving terrible advice for solo doctors. Thanks again. " As can be seen, he is pretty adamant about not being a sole proprietorship. Obviously, the attorneys have differing opinions on this but Mr. DeFranceso sounds more convinced in his view than the FPM author does. By the way, I have no financial interest in Mr. DeFranceso's book, services, etc & have never talked to him. My only knowledge of him is the book of his that I've read on doctor asset protection/wealth preservation (he gives his e-mail address in the book, for questions). Boy, if I were running my office as a sole proprietorship I sure think I would be making a change, but that is just me. I am glad I'm an LLC & that option is available here in Ohio. * Re: Practice Types > > The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic > concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole > proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of > course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as > practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk > in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits > (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I > believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my > sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, > may none of us ever be involved in any such suits! > > Sharon > > At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: > > I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. > But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when > setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant > about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take > the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told > that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully > argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is > the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably > wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to > be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state > to state? > > Greg > > > Brock DO wrote: > >> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as >> " sole proprietor " are either mistaken or have checked with a good >> health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, >> unless you want to risk everything you own. >> >> >> > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 , here in Ohio you ARE personally liable for medical malpractice above your policy limits even if you are incorporated, employed, s corp, c corp etc... I know it doesn't sound fair, but its true. I know you have a book that says something else but a great deal of law is based on precedent (sp?). The fact is that most plaintiff attys won't ask for more than the malpractice limit but in Ohio there is precedent for going above for REALLY BAD behavior and the physician can be personally liable for a settlement. The health care atty I consulted with when I formed my last "partnership" (we actually shared space, call, staff etc... but were individual business owners) said those instances involved criminal malpractice type cases of intentional wrong doing. I was a sole proprietor for a while. The main reason I incorporated is that the self employment tax was a lot (can't remember amt) until you reach $80 K in income and I had a hard time getting there. My accountant recommended llc or c corp, which she did for me at $500, and I saved that in self employment tax in the first year. You are at risk for those slip and fall type suits, but again, I had business insurance. Remember that sometimes books get quickly outdated in medicine, I think that is probably true for other things as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 , here in Ohio you ARE personally liable for medical malpractice above your policy limits even if you are incorporated, employed, s corp, c corp etc... I know it doesn't sound fair, but its true. I know you have a book that says something else but a great deal of law is based on precedent (sp?). The fact is that most plaintiff attys won't ask for more than the malpractice limit but in Ohio there is precedent for going above for REALLY BAD behavior and the physician can be personally liable for a settlement. The health care atty I consulted with when I formed my last "partnership" (we actually shared space, call, staff etc... but were individual business owners) said those instances involved criminal malpractice type cases of intentional wrong doing. I was a sole proprietor for a while. The main reason I incorporated is that the self employment tax was a lot (can't remember amt) until you reach $80 K in income and I had a hard time getting there. My accountant recommended llc or c corp, which she did for me at $500, and I saved that in self employment tax in the first year. You are at risk for those slip and fall type suits, but again, I had business insurance. Remember that sometimes books get quickly outdated in medicine, I think that is probably true for other things as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 No, you are confusing malpractice liability with other general liability associated with running a medical practice (or any business where the public uses your facility for services). Of course you could still be held liable for a malpractice judgement over & above your policy limits for severe negligence in practice, and that is where asset protection comes in. That is not what we are talking about. Example: a patient slips & falls on your ice-covered ramp, cracks her head on the ice, and suffers permanent brain damage. A jury finds you liable & returns a verdict for $3,000,000 (easy to imagine in this day and age). Lets's say you have a $1,000,000 umbrella policy to cover you for general office liability (not your malpractice policy). You are now on the hook to pay $2,000,000 out of pocket. Why do you think all apartment complexes, rental properties, etc are owned by an LLC or corp? Because the owners would otherwise be 100% personally liable for any & all suits against them. A medical office is no different. In my case, by operating as an LLC, I would not be personally liable for the extra $2,000,000 in the example above because the verdict was against the LLC & not me personally (these are one & the same in a sole proprietorship). When I set up my practice 2 years ago the attorney said in the last 10 years he had never started up a new practice with anything ! other than an LLC, other than one S-corp. > > From: mkcl6@... > Date: 2006/05/18 Thu PM 05:52:43 EDT > To: > Subject: Re: Practice Types > > , here in Ohio you ARE personally liable for medical malpractice above > your policy limits even if you are incorporated, employed, s corp, c corp > etc... I know it doesn't sound fair, but its true. I know you have a book that > says something else but a great deal of law is based on precedent (sp?). The > fact is that most plaintiff attys won't ask for more than the malpractice > limit but in Ohio there is precedent for going above for REALLY BAD behavior > and the physician can be personally liable for a settlement. The health care > atty I consulted with when I formed my last " partnership " (we actually shared > space, call, staff etc... but were individual business owners) said those > instances involved criminal malpractice type cases of intentional wrong doing. > > I was a sole proprietor for a while. The main reason I incorporated is that > the self employment tax was a lot (can't remember amt) until you reach $80 K > in income and I had a hard time getting there. My accountant recommended llc > or c corp, which she did for me at $500, and I saved that in self employment > tax in the first year. You are at risk for those slip and fall type suits, > but again, I had business insurance. > > Remember that sometimes books get quickly outdated in medicine, I think that > is probably true for other things as well. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 No, you are confusing malpractice liability with other general liability associated with running a medical practice (or any business where the public uses your facility for services). Of course you could still be held liable for a malpractice judgement over & above your policy limits for severe negligence in practice, and that is where asset protection comes in. That is not what we are talking about. Example: a patient slips & falls on your ice-covered ramp, cracks her head on the ice, and suffers permanent brain damage. A jury finds you liable & returns a verdict for $3,000,000 (easy to imagine in this day and age). Lets's say you have a $1,000,000 umbrella policy to cover you for general office liability (not your malpractice policy). You are now on the hook to pay $2,000,000 out of pocket. Why do you think all apartment complexes, rental properties, etc are owned by an LLC or corp? Because the owners would otherwise be 100% personally liable for any & all suits against them. A medical office is no different. In my case, by operating as an LLC, I would not be personally liable for the extra $2,000,000 in the example above because the verdict was against the LLC & not me personally (these are one & the same in a sole proprietorship). When I set up my practice 2 years ago the attorney said in the last 10 years he had never started up a new practice with anything ! other than an LLC, other than one S-corp. > > From: mkcl6@... > Date: 2006/05/18 Thu PM 05:52:43 EDT > To: > Subject: Re: Practice Types > > , here in Ohio you ARE personally liable for medical malpractice above > your policy limits even if you are incorporated, employed, s corp, c corp > etc... I know it doesn't sound fair, but its true. I know you have a book that > says something else but a great deal of law is based on precedent (sp?). The > fact is that most plaintiff attys won't ask for more than the malpractice > limit but in Ohio there is precedent for going above for REALLY BAD behavior > and the physician can be personally liable for a settlement. The health care > atty I consulted with when I formed my last " partnership " (we actually shared > space, call, staff etc... but were individual business owners) said those > instances involved criminal malpractice type cases of intentional wrong doing. > > I was a sole proprietor for a while. The main reason I incorporated is that > the self employment tax was a lot (can't remember amt) until you reach $80 K > in income and I had a hard time getting there. My accountant recommended llc > or c corp, which she did for me at $500, and I saved that in self employment > tax in the first year. You are at risk for those slip and fall type suits, > but again, I had business insurance. > > Remember that sometimes books get quickly outdated in medicine, I think that > is probably true for other things as well. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 Our attorney, who suggestes an LLC, said that none of our personal assets are at risk, only those of the LLC. A judgment could max out our malpractice limit and take all that our office possesses but I don't think it can go beyond that into personal assets..........but maybe my attorney was wrong Rian Mintek, MD Re: Practice Types The recent Family Practice Management journal article on this topic concluded by stating that the author generally recommends a sole proprietorship to new solo docs and an S-Corp to new groups. Of course, everyone should carry malpractice insurance as well as practice liability insurance. Everyone's personal assets are at risk in the case of a malpractice award exceeding your insurance limits (rare as this is), no matter what type of practice you are in. I believe this is the more likely scenario then someone slipping on my sidewalk & winning a suit past my insurance limits. That being said, may none of us ever be involved in any such suits!Sharon At 03:13 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote: I did not respond to the poll. Been too busy to even read the messages. But this one caught my eye. I am a sole proprietor. Five years ago, when setting all of this up, I did consult an attorney and an accountant about the best type of practice to set up. I was advised to just take the sole proprietor route. When I asked about liabilities, I was told that in my state, even as a small corp, litigants had successfully argued that personal assetts should be reach-able, since the solo dr. is the corp and the corp is the solo doctor. I was told that this probably wouldn't matter, but we put the house in the wife's name anyway, just to be safe. So maybe the risk of being a sole proprietor varies from state to state?Greg Brock DO wrote:> As I mentioned before, I sure hope those 7 people that responded as > “sole proprietor” are either mistaken or have checked with a good > health care attorney because that is supposedly an absolute no-no, > unless you want to risk everything you own.>> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.