What is the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act?

Useful Resources for Uniform Voidable Transactions Act

Recent Rulings on Uniform Voidable Transactions Act

DEAN J. ZAMANI VS. JOHN DINOVI, ET AL

On November 14, 2011, Plaintiff filed a complaint for Breach of Contract, Fraud, Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, and Violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200. On January 19, 2012, Dinovi filed a cross-complaint against Zamani and Zamani Enterprises for Declaratory Relief, Breach of Contract, Common Counts, and Defamation. Zamani Enterprises was dismissed from the cross-complaint on March 16, 2012. The court granted Plaintiff leave to file a first amended complaint on January 23, 2014.

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINSTRATION VS BATES

In addition, an effort to transmute sale-proceeds that were CP into the nondebtor spouse’s SP, might implicate the uniform voidable transactions act. (See Civ. Code § 3439.01(a), (m) and 3439.04(a), (b); Fam. Code § 851; State Bd. of Equalization v. Woo (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 481, 484 (“[a]ppellant's attempt to transmute [a property] interest to avoid [spouse] Ho's tax debt” was unsuccessful”); Mejia v. Reed (2003) 31 Cal.4th 657, 668.) Finally, it appears that tracing does not impact the matter.

  • Hearing

    Aug 28, 2020

BASTA, INC. VS AMYGDALA, INC.

Code § 3439.04, subd. (a).) Here, the Complaint alleges that BAG made the transfer while it was insolvent, without receiving a reasonably equivalent value, with the intent to avoid debt, and to Basta’s injury. (Complaint ¶¶ 4–8.) Amygdala does not explain how any of the above elements are missing. Rather, Amgydala argues that no claim exists because the Complaint does not state sufficient facts to imply the existence of actual intent, as laid out in Civil Code § 3439.04, subd. (b). (Demurrer at pp. 7–8.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 24, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

MARIA CARMEN LEAL VS. NELLY DAGSTANYAN

The second amended complaint, filed June 22, 2018 in the EC064805 action, alleges causes of action for: (1) fraudulent transfer of real property under the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (“UVTA”) against Grant Dagstanyan, Nelly Dagstanyan, Aresen Stepanyan, Maro Haroutunian, Marika Bastramajian, and Andranik Aleksayan; (2) fraudulent transfer of corporate property and assets under the UVTA against Grant Dagstanyan, Nelly Dagstanyan and Khachig Mestchyan; (3) constructive trust against Grant Dagstanyan, Nelly

  • Hearing

    Aug 21, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

DONGGUAN CITY MADU GARMENTS CO., LTD VS KLK FORTE INDUSTRY, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Civil Code section 3439.04 . . . provides that a transfer is fraudulent if the debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent consideration and either ‘(1) Was engaged or about to engage in a business or a transaction for which the remaining assets of the debtor were unreasonably small in relation to the business or transaction; or (2) Intended to incur, or believed or reasonably should have believed that he or she would incur, debts beyond his or her ability to pay as they became due.’

  • Hearing

    Aug 13, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

DANIEL W. HOPP VS 33428 CALVEST MALIBU, LLC, ET AL.,

In addition to the declaratory relief action against Credit Suisse, Plaintiff also filed a common law fraudulent transfer action as well as a statutory California Uniform Voidable Transactions Act cause of action related to the above-mentioned transfers. Since Plaintiff met his burden as to the first two prongs, the burden shifts to Defendant to show that exercising jurisdiction does not comport with fair play and substantial justice.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINISTRATION VS. BATES

In addition, an effort to transmute sale-proceeds that were CP into the nondebtor spouse’s SP, might implicate the uniform voidable transactions act. (See Civ. Code § 3439.01(a), (m) and 3439.04(a), (b); Fam. Code § 851; State Bd. of Equalization v. Woo (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 481, 484 (“[a]ppellant's attempt to transmute [a property] interest to avoid [spouse] Ho's tax debt” was unsuccessful”); Mejia v. Reed (2003) 31 Cal.4th 657, 668.) Finally, it appears that tracing does not impact the matter.

  • Hearing

    Aug 07, 2020

MUGHRABI V. S.A.M. POMONA LLC

However, there is a cause of action that does exist for Violation of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (Civ. Code § 3439 et seq.).

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2020

NEWSTART REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT LLC VS 325 FLAMINGO LLC ET A

Issue Two: Plaintiff’s Fraudulent Transfer Cause of Action is Barred as a Matter of Law Defendants next appear to contend that Plaintiff’s Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“UFTA”) claim is also time-barred because “specific corporate code limitation” provided in NRS 86.343 and 86.505 control over any limitations period in the UFTA. (Motion, 7-8.) Defendants appear to rely on Renda v.

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2020

MUGHRABI V. S.A.M. POMONA LLC

However, there is a cause of action that does exist for Violation of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (Civ. Code § 3439 et seq.).

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2020

ACMC FINANACE AND TRADE LLC VS ENERGY TRADING COMPANY LLC, ET AL.

Civil Code §3439.04(a)(1) Plaintiff’s complaint erroneously names this cause of action as grounded in CCP §3439.04(a)(1), rather than Civil Code §3439.04(a)(1). Plaintiff must fix this defect in the amended complaint.

  • Hearing

    Jul 30, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Promisory Note

FURONG YE, ET AL. VS GUOZHONG CHEN, ET AL.

Code, § 3439.04, subd. (a).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 29, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CINDY M. HANN V. THERESA LYNN COLOSI

Code §3439.04. Thus, to prevail on a fraudulent transfer claim, a plaintiff creditor must allege and prove that the defendant debtor transferred property to another with the intent of hindering, delaying, or defrauding the plaintiff. “Transfer” means to voluntarily or involuntarily “dispos[e] of or part[] with an asset or an interest in an asset.” Civ. Code §3439.01, subd. (m).

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

SMARTMED, INC. V. FIRSTCHOICE MEDICAL GROUP, INC.

“The Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA) [now the UVTA], codified in Civil Code section 3439 et seq., ‘permits defrauded creditors to reach property in the hands of a transferee.’” (Filip v. Bucurenciu (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 825, 829, quoting Mejia v. Reed (2003) 31 Cal.4th 657, 663.) “A fraudulent conveyance under the UFTA involves ‘“‘a transfer by the debtor of property to a third person undertaken with the intent to prevent a creditor from reaching that interest to satisfy its claim.’”’

  • Hearing

    Jul 24, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

LEDCOR CONSTRUCTION INC VS. S & S ENTITIES, LLC

Third cause of action to set aside a fraudulent transfer A fraudulent transfer claim under the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act is codified in Civil Code section 3439, et seq. “A fraudulent conveyance is a transfer by the debtor of property to a third person undertaken with the intent to prevent a creditor from reaching that interest to satisfy its claim.” Kirkeby v. Superior Court of Orange County (2004) 33 Cal.4th 642, 648.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

MOURIS AHDOUT VS HEKMATJAH FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ET AL

A transfer under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA) is defined as “‘every mode, direct or indirect, absolute or conditional, voluntary or involuntary, of disposing of or parting with an asset . . . , and includes payment of money, release, lease, and creation of a lien or other encumbrance.” (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

H. THOMAS JONES, VS WILLIAM JEFFREY TOMILSON, ET AL.

The third cause of action is under the California Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (“CUVTA”). Plaintiff brings this action for a fraudulent transfer against Rieck, the LLC, and DOGAG on the June 13, 2017 Deed of Trust in favor of DOGAG. In the demurrer, Defendant argues that Plaintiff’s third cause of action seeks to void the interest allegedly transferred by a June 13, 2017, Deed of Trust in favor of DOGAG, based on provisions of CUVTA.

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

HOWARD FUCHS VS JOEL WERTMAN ET AL

Actual Fraudulent Transfer (1st COA) “A fraudulent conveyance claim is set forth in the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA), which is codified in Civil Code section 3439 et seq. ‘A fraudulent conveyance is a transfer by the debtor of property to a third person undertaken with the intent to prevent a creditor from reaching that interest to satisfy its claim.’

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

DECATHLON ALPHA II, L.P. V. PIXEL MAGS, INC., ET AL.

Fraudulent Transfer 9th Cause of Action) In the ninth cause of action, Plaintiff alleges that the defendants violated Civil Code section 3439.04 (“Section 3439.04”) by transferring the assets of Pixel Mags in order to place them out of reach of its creditors, including Plaintiff. (FAC, ¶¶ 83-86.) This code section applies to the transfers of assets made with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud a creditor.

  • Hearing

    Jul 16, 2020

STRATEGIC ENTERPRISES, INC., DOING BUSINESS AS LOA VENTURES, INC. VS FELIPE CASALDUC ET AL.

The Berger case cited by the Plaintiff appears to be on point and to specifically allow for punitive damages where they are properly plead in a UVTA action. However, Plaintiff needs to plead specific facts in order to properly plead punitive damages.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

CHARMANE JOHNSON VS DONALD KAISERMAN, ET AL.

On March 24, 2020, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), asserting causes of action against Kaiserman, VIP and Does 1-100 for Breach of Contract Intentional Tort Common Counts Violation of Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (UVTA )—Civ. Code §§ 3439.04 and 3439.05 A Case Management Conference is set for July 10, 2020. 1-3.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

STEVEN POWERS VS MARCOS VIVIAN, ET AL.

(Civil Code § 3439.04 (a).)b “In order for a fraudulent transfer to occur, among other things, there must be a transfer of an asset as defined in the UFTA.” (Fidelity National Title Ins. Co. v. Schroeder (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 834, 841.) Moving Defendants contend that Plaintiff’s fourth cause of action is insufficiently pled because the fourth cause of action fails to identify which property(s) were allegedly fraudulently transferred and to whom. (Demurrer, 9-11.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

LUIS GOMEZ, ET AL. VS PATRICK CHAPMAN

For obvious reasons, this is a factor under the UVTA for determining fraudulent intent. (Civ. Code § 3439.04(b)(8).) But this is not a basis for a grantor setting aside a grant deed because a grant deed is not voided for lack of consideration. (Wooster v. Department of Fish & Game (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1020, 1030.) For another, AMAG pursues an aiding and abetting theory of liability.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

HUGO IVAN MALDONADO VS LUIS GONZALEZ, ET AL.

Boulter, John Scott, and Debra Scott for (1) quiet title; (2) financial dependent adult abuse; (3) unfair and deceptive practices; (4) predatory lending; (5) unconscionability; (6) rescission and restitution; (7) cancellation of written instrument; (8) theft; (9) common count: money had and received; (10) conversion; (11) fraud – count 1; (12) fraud – count II; (13) breach of fiduciary duty; (14) intentional violation of Uniform Voidable Transactions Act; (15) constructive fraudulent transfer; (16) aiding and

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

ANDREA LOMBARDI VS RONALD F LOMBARDI AND KATHLEEN A LOMBARDI

Fraudulent Transfer (11th COA) – Eugene & Lombardi Sons “A fraudulent conveyance claim is set forth in the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA), which is codified in Civil Code section 3439 et seq. ‘A fraudulent conveyance is a transfer by the debtor of property to a third person undertaken with the intent to prevent a creditor from reaching that interest to satisfy its claim.’

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 21     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.