New Ground in Asset Protection: What In Re CES 2007 Trust Means for Planners
A recent Delaware court decision may mark a turning point for domestic asset protection planning. In In Re CES 2007 Trust, a self-settled Delaware DAPT survived scrutiny despite the settlor maintaining roles as investment advisor and real estate manager, positions that many previously thought could jeopardize creditor protection.
DAPT Validation in a Challenging Context
In this timely webinar, Jonathan Blattmachr, Alan Gassman, Martin Shenkman, and Abigail O’Connor discuss the implications of the CES 2007 Trust decision. The case signals that Delaware courts may take a more practical and forgiving view of DAPT structures, even when the settlor retains certain administrative or advisory roles.
The court held that these “foot faults” were not fatal. Instead, the trust’s core structure, supported by Delaware statute, held up under challenge. This creates a more encouraging precedent for advisors who build trusts for clients who need asset protection without completely relinquishing involvement.
Beyond the Case: Planning in a Post-CES World
The panelists also explore broader planning strategies beyond Delaware’s borders. From Hybrid-DAPTs to SPATs (Special Power of Appointment Trusts), the discussion turns to how to preserve flexibility, improve creditor resistance, and design structures that are more likely to withstand scrutiny in and outside of Delaware.
They also revisit the role of solvency affidavits, emphasizing how they continue to provide critical backup in the face of future litigation—even if courts are increasingly favoring form and intent over technical perfection.
Practical Takeaways for Practitioners
Key recommendations include refining trust language, separating fiduciary powers, carefully structuring investment roles, and understanding the full faith and credit implications across states. Advisors are also reminded to consider lifetime transfers and how Hybrid-DAPTs can integrate with estate, tax, and retirement planning goals.
As Shenkman notes, "This case doesn’t change the risks—but it gives us a better playbook."
Watch the full webinar to learn how this case fits into the broader evolution of asset protection and how your clients can benefit from careful, state-informed trust planning.