He who made a gross miscalculation of the amount of damages (as a scare tactic) in Spencer v Hartford and “made” associate law professor Adam Scales “a household name”, is now so emboldened by the proposed settlement to suggest that such case be “prostituted” and used as a threat to scare defendants into 468B trusts. It's not like we haven't seen the scare tactic before. Look at the cottage industry that sprung up after Grillo v Pettiete et al. Cause No.96-145090-92 and Grillo v Henry Cause 96-167943-96, 96th District Court, Tarrant County, TX, whereafter plaintiff attorneys were lobbied by certain advisers over the perceived threat of legal malpractice.

Read the rest here:
Spencer v Hartford Begats "468B Risk Management" Panacea for Defendants from Plaintiff Advisors?