Aboutwhy sjkplawyerspracticesInsightsCase StudyNewsLocations
Corporate & Bankruptcy

Elements of Fraudulent Conveyance

A debtor deeded the house to a spouse after a lawsuit was filed, or moved equipment into a new company with a similar name. Before that can be undone, you need to know what has to be proven.

Reviewed

01 GUIDE

Elements of Fraudulent Conveyance: what usually happens

Two theories and a change in New York

The elements of fraudulent conveyance fall into two broad families. One is built on intent: the debtor made the transfer to keep assets away from creditors. The other does not require bad intent and focuses instead on what the debtor received in exchange and on the debtor's financial condition at the time. New York replaced its older fraudulent conveyance statute with a version of the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act, and which version applies generally depends on when the transfer was made, so older transfers can still be judged under the prior rules. Many courts and lawyers still use the older phrase even when the newer statute governs.

Proving intent without an admission

Debtors rarely admit trying to defeat creditors, so intent is usually shown through circumstances. Courts look at patterns often called badges of fraud, such as a transfer to a family member made while litigation was pending, or a debtor who kept using property after supposedly giving it away. No single circumstance is decisive, but several together can support an inference that leaves the other side needing to explain the transaction. Deeds, bank records, corporate filings, the timeline of the creditor's claim, and testimony about who used the property afterward are usually the core evidence.

Matching the theory to the facts

Where the facts show a transfer for little or nothing while the debtor was already in trouble, the theory based on value and financial condition can avoid the need to prove intent, though it raises valuation questions of its own. Where a fair price was arguably paid but the circumstances suggest a scheme, the intent theory may be the only route, and the recipient's own good faith usually becomes a central question. Remedies can include setting the transfer aside so the creditor can reach the property and, in some situations, a judgment against the person who received it. In a first meeting we review the timeline and documents and decide which theory fits and whether early measures, such as an attachment, are worth seeking.

02 ATTORNEYS

Who you would be working with

Attorneys at our New York and Washington, D.C. offices handle matters like this one.

04 HOW WE WORK

Client-centered service across jurisdictions

Global Coordination & Expertise

We deliver coordinated and effective legal services to our clients, utilizing our extensive legal resources and experienced attorneys in our well-integrated global network. Through our Washington D.C. and New York offices, together with our alliance

Multilingual & Cross-Border Communication

Our attorneys are experienced in both domestic and international matters and, with fluency in various languages, provide clear and consistent communication at every stage of your legal process.

Client-Centered Approach

Client service lies at the heart of our operations. From the initial consultation, we prioritize understanding your situation, listening to your goals, and providing regular updates and strategies tailored to your individual case.

Multidisciplinary & Efficient Solutions

Our multidisciplinary approach and established processes enable us to address cross-border challenges with efficiency.

05 OFFICES

Where we meet clients

Consultations are available in person or remotely.

New York

285 Fulton Street, New York, NY 10007
(855) 529-7557

Washington, D.C.

Suite 985, 1717 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006
(855) 529-7557

Los Angeles

1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 820, Los Angeles, CA 90067
(424) 561-7557

Attorney Advertising. This page is general information about elements of fraudulent conveyance and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Outcomes depend on the facts of each matter, and prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Laws differ by state and change over time.