UVTA Decision Path
Site.Maindecisionpath History
Hide minor edits - Show changes to markup
https://voidabletransactions.com/images/UVTA_Decision_Chart_220617a.png
Step #3. Does The Creditor Have A Remedy?
Step #3. What Is The Creditor's Remedy?
- While the structural arrangement of the statutory text of the UVTA is, like its predecessors, insufferable, the actual decision-making process that a litigator will go through to determine if a fraudulent transfer exists is actually relatively straightforward and not complex. The following decision path illustrates this process. While this decision path isn't exactly right, see Note below the chart, it should assist litigators in reaching a quick conclusion as to whether a given voidable transaction action is viable.
While the structural arrangement of the statutory text of the UVTA is, like its predecessors, insufferable, the actual decision-making process that a litigator will go through to determine if a fraudulent transfer exists is actually relatively straightforward and not complex. The following decision path illustrates this process. While this decision path isn't exactly right, see Note below the chart, it should assist litigators in reaching a quick conclusion as to whether a given voidable transaction action is viable.
Step #1. Is The Transfer Voidable?
Step #1. Is The Transfer Voidable?
- If the transferee can establish at least one defense, the creditor loses. If not, then go to Step #3.
While the structural arrangement of the statutory text of the UVTA is, like its predecessors, insufferable, the actual decision-making process that a litigator will go through to determine if a fraudulent transfer exists is actually relatively straightforward and not complex. The following decision path illustrates this process. While this decision path isn't exactly right, see Note below the chart, it should assist litigators in reaching a quick conclusion as to whether a given voidable transaction action is viable.
- While the structural arrangement of the statutory text of the UVTA is, like its predecessors, insufferable, the actual decision-making process that a litigator will go through to determine if a fraudulent transfer exists is actually relatively straightforward and not complex. The following decision path illustrates this process. While this decision path isn't exactly right, see Note below the chart, it should assist litigators in reaching a quick conclusion as to whether a given voidable transaction action is viable.
Step #2. Can The Transferee Assert A Defense?
Step #2. Can The Transferee Assert A Defense?
- The Extinguishment Period Has Run § 9Transferee Was In Good Faith And Gave Value § 8(d)
Step #3. Does The Creditor Have A Remedy?
Step #3. Does The Creditor Have A Remedy?
- Non-Monetary Remedy (Avoidance, etc.) § 7Money Judgment § 8(b) and (c)
- Non-Monetary Remedy (Avoidance, etc.) § 7Money Judgment § 8(b) and (c)
- While the structural arrangement of the statutory text of the UVTA is, like its predecessors, insufferable, the actual decision-making process that a litigator will go through to determine if a fraudulent transfer exists is actually relatively straightforward and not complex. The following decision path illustrates this process. While this decision path isn't exactly right, see Note below the chart, it should assist litigators in reaching a quick conclusion as to whether a given voidable transaction action is viable.
While the structural arrangement of the statutory text of the UVTA is, like its predecessors, insufferable, the actual decision-making process that a litigator will go through to determine if a fraudulent transfer exists is actually relatively straightforward and not complex. The following decision path illustrates this process. While this decision path isn't exactly right, see Note below the chart, it should assist litigators in reaching a quick conclusion as to whether a given voidable transaction action is viable.
(:title UVTA Decision Path:)
(:Summary: UVTA Decision Path:)
(:description UVTA Decision Path:)
(:keywords voidable transaction, uvta, fraudulent transfer, ufta, fraudulent conveyance, decision path, test:)
(:linebreaks:)
Decision_Path Maindecisionpath
VOIDABLE TRANSACTION DECISION PATH
- While the structural arrangement of the statutory text of the UVTA is, like its predecessors, insufferable, the actual decision-making process that a litigator will go through to determine if a fraudulent transfer exists is actually relatively straightforward and not complex. The following decision path illustrates this process. While this decision path isn't exactly right, see Note below the chart, it should assist litigators in reaching a quick conclusion as to whether a given voidable transaction action is viable.
Step #1. Is The Transfer Voidable?
Step #2. Can The Transferee Assert A Defense?
Step #3. Does The Creditor Have A Remedy?
NOTE: Arguably, one might look at the defenses first, i.e., if the transferee was in good faith and gave reasonably equivalent value, or if the action has been extinguished by the passage of time, then the remainder of the analysis can be no more than academic. However, at least with the extinguishment issue, this can become a "chicken/egg" sort of question, as there are different extinguishment periods for different sorts of voidable transactions.
DECISION PATH TOPICS AND OPINIONS
(:pagelist link=Category.Decision_Path list=normal fmt=title:)