Site /
Remedy ~ Attachment
Site.Mainuvta07a02remedyattachment History
Show minor edits - Show changes to output
Changed lines 1-4 from:
(:title TOPICSHORT:)
(:Summary:TOPICLONG:)
(:descriptionTOPICLONG:)
(:keywords voidable transaction, uvta, fraudulent transfer, ufta, fraudulent conveyance, remedy, remedies,TOPIC:)
(:Summary:
(:description
(:keywords voidable transaction, uvta, fraudulent transfer, ufta, fraudulent conveyance, remedy, remedies,
to:
(:title Remedy ~ Attachment:)
(:Summary: Remedy ~ Attachment:)
(:description Remedy ~ Attachment:)
(:keywords voidable transaction, uvta, fraudulent transfer, ufta, fraudulent conveyance, remedy, remedies, attachment:)
(:Summary: Remedy ~ Attachment:)
(:description Remedy ~ Attachment:)
(:keywords voidable transaction, uvta, fraudulent transfer, ufta, fraudulent conveyance, remedy, remedies, attachment:)
Changed line 6 from:
to:
Attachment [[!Non-Money]] [[!Remedies]] [--Mainuvta07a02remedyattachment--]
Changed lines 8-52 from:
to:
!!ATTACHMENT
!!!ATTACHMENT § 7(a)(2)
[+(a) In an action for relief against a transfer or obligation under this [Act], a creditor, subject to the limitations in Section 8, may obtain:+]
->[+(2) an attachment or other provisional remedy against the asset transferred or other property of the transferee if available under applicable law; and+]
->Reporter's Comment to §7(a)(2) cmt. 2.
-->The availability of an attachment or other provisional remedy has been restricted by amendments of statutes and rules of procedure in response to Connecticut v. Doehr, 501 U.S. 1 (1991), Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp., 395 U.S. 337 (1969), and their progeny.
-->This judicial development and the procedural changes that followed in its wake do not preclude resort to attachment by a creditor in seeking avoidance of a transfer or obligation. See, e.g., Britton v. Howard Sav. Bank, 727 F.2d 315, 317-20 (3d Cir. 1984); Computer Sciences Corp. v. Sci-Tek Inc., 367 A.2d 658, 661 (Del. Super. 1976); Great Lakes Carbon Corp. v. Fontana, 54 A.D.2d 548, 387 N.Y.S.2d 115 (1st Dep’t 1976).
-->Section 7(a)(2) continues the authorization for the use of attachment contained in § 9(b) of the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, or of a similar provisional remedy, when applicable law provides therefor, subject to the constraints imposed by the due process clauses of the United States and state constitutions.
->JayNote
-->If state law allows, the Creditor may get a pre-judgment attachment against the transferred asset.
!!!BURDEN OF PROOF § 7(g)
[+(g) The following rules determine the burden of proving matters referred to in this section: +]
->[+(1) A party that seeks to invoke subsection (a), (d), (e), or (f) has the burden of proving the applicability of that subsection. +]
->[+(2) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (3) and (4), the creditor has the burden of proving each applicable element of subsection (b) or (c). +]
->[+(3) The transferee has the burden of proving the applicability to the transferee of subsection (b)(1)(ii)(A) or (B). +]
->[+(4) A party that seeks adjustment under subsection (c) has the burden of proving the adjustment. +]
->JayNote
-->The burden of proving entitlement to a money judgment is on the Creditor.
!!!STANDARD OF PROOF § 7(h)
[+(h) The standard of proof required to establish matters referred to in this section is preponderance of the evidence. +]
->Prefatory Note (UVTA 2014). Evidentiary Matters.
-->New §§ 4(c), 5(c), 8(g), and 8(h) add uniform rules allocating the burden of proof and defining the standard of proof with respect to claims for relief and defenses under the Act.
-->Language in the former comments to § 2 relating to the presumption of insolvency created by § 2(b) has been moved to the text of that provision, the better to assure its uniform application.
!!!ATTACHMENT § 7(a)(2)
[+(a) In an action for relief against a transfer or obligation under this [Act], a creditor, subject to the limitations in Section 8, may obtain:+]
->[+(2) an attachment or other provisional remedy against the asset transferred or other property of the transferee if available under applicable law; and+]
->Reporter's Comment to §7(a)(2) cmt. 2.
-->The availability of an attachment or other provisional remedy has been restricted by amendments of statutes and rules of procedure in response to Connecticut v. Doehr, 501 U.S. 1 (1991), Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp., 395 U.S. 337 (1969), and their progeny.
-->This judicial development and the procedural changes that followed in its wake do not preclude resort to attachment by a creditor in seeking avoidance of a transfer or obligation. See, e.g., Britton v. Howard Sav. Bank, 727 F.2d 315, 317-20 (3d Cir. 1984); Computer Sciences Corp. v. Sci-Tek Inc., 367 A.2d 658, 661 (Del. Super. 1976); Great Lakes Carbon Corp. v. Fontana, 54 A.D.2d 548, 387 N.Y.S.2d 115 (1st Dep’t 1976).
-->Section 7(a)(2) continues the authorization for the use of attachment contained in § 9(b) of the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, or of a similar provisional remedy, when applicable law provides therefor, subject to the constraints imposed by the due process clauses of the United States and state constitutions.
->JayNote
-->If state law allows, the Creditor may get a pre-judgment attachment against the transferred asset.
!!!BURDEN OF PROOF § 7(g)
[+(g) The following rules determine the burden of proving matters referred to in this section: +]
->[+(1) A party that seeks to invoke subsection (a), (d), (e), or (f) has the burden of proving the applicability of that subsection. +]
->[+(2) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (3) and (4), the creditor has the burden of proving each applicable element of subsection (b) or (c). +]
->[+(3) The transferee has the burden of proving the applicability to the transferee of subsection (b)(1)(ii)(A) or (B). +]
->[+(4) A party that seeks adjustment under subsection (c) has the burden of proving the adjustment. +]
->JayNote
-->The burden of proving entitlement to a money judgment is on the Creditor.
!!!STANDARD OF PROOF § 7(h)
[+(h) The standard of proof required to establish matters referred to in this section is preponderance of the evidence. +]
->Prefatory Note (UVTA 2014). Evidentiary Matters.
-->New §§ 4(c), 5(c), 8(g), and 8(h) add uniform rules allocating the burden of proof and defining the standard of proof with respect to claims for relief and defenses under the Act.
-->Language in the former comments to § 2 relating to the presumption of insolvency created by § 2(b) has been moved to the text of that provision, the better to assure its uniform application.
Changed lines 56-58 from:
!!!TEXT TOPICS AND OPINIONS
(:pagelist link=Category.TEXT list=normal fmt=title:)
(:pagelist link=Category.
to:
!!!ATTACHMENT TOPICS AND OPINIONS
(:pagelist link=Category.Attachment list=normal fmt=title:)
(:pagelist link=Category.Attachment list=normal fmt=title:)
Added lines 1-18:
(:title TOPICSHORT:)
(:Summary: TOPICLONG:)
(:description TOPICLONG:)
(:keywords voidable transaction, uvta, fraudulent transfer, ufta, fraudulent conveyance, remedy, remedies, TOPIC:)
(:linebreaks:)
TOPIC [[!Remedies]] [--PAGENAME--]
[[<<]]
TEXT
[[<<]]
[[<<]]
----
!!!TEXT TOPICS AND OPINIONS
(:pagelist link=Category.TEXT list=normal fmt=title:)
----
(:Summary: TOPICLONG:)
(:description TOPICLONG:)
(:keywords voidable transaction, uvta, fraudulent transfer, ufta, fraudulent conveyance, remedy, remedies, TOPIC:)
(:linebreaks:)
TOPIC [[!Remedies]] [--PAGENAME--]
[[<<]]
TEXT
[[<<]]
[[<<]]
----
!!!TEXT TOPICS AND OPINIONS
(:pagelist link=Category.TEXT list=normal fmt=title:)
----