![]() ![]() ![]() First, it renames the act as the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act and change numerous references from “fraudulent” to “voidable”. The UVTA provides a number of significant changes to the UFTA. Because intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors is seldom capable of direct proof, courts instead have relied on badges of fraud to prove intent. The law permits creditors to void the transaction in two situations, (i.) when a debtor transfers assets with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud any creditor, or (ii.) when a debtor transfers assets without receiving reasonably equivalent value. The Court of Appeals found that the circuit court could not rely on vague notions of equity, but had to apply MUVTA as written. However, the LLC received no value for this transfer. A judgment of divorce transferred all assets of an LLC to the spouse of the member of the LLC. Another case involved the intersection of corporate law, family law and the MUVTA. ![]() The Court granted our creditor client’s relief and entered a judgment against the partner for the transferred funds. One case involved a debtor who used his domestic partner’s bank account to hide assets and avoid creditors. Simon PLC has recently litigated multiple actions seeking the recovery and avoidance of voidable transfers under UVTA. In sum, it provides a creditor with the means to reach assets that a debtor has transferred to another person for the purpose of keeping them from being used to satisfy a debt. The UFTA is the most widely adopted statute in the United States addressing fraudulent conveyances. Simon PLC Attorneys & Counselors – April 2021 Memorandumīloomfield Hills, Michigan – Michigan has become one of a number of states to adopt the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (“UVTA”) which amends the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“UFTA”). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |