| Legal ForumsRegisterSign inBankruptcyBusinessCriminalEmploymentFamilyImmigrationReal EstateMore... | ChatUpcomingArchiveHelpAsk a LawyerMost Recent Q&AAsk a QuestionAsk a Lawyer Archive |
In Thompson v. Hanson, --- P.3d ---- (2009) the Supreme Court made it easier to reverse fraudulent conveyances – at least in the Eastern Division of Washington State.
Under Washington's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA), chapter 19.40 RCW, creditors have a cause of action against transferees who received fraudulently conveyed property of debtors. Division III added (“read in”) the requirement that there be intent to defraud. The UFTA statute does not require intent.
Divisions I & II of the Court of Appeals disagreed and applied UFTA to all transfers where there is a lack of reasonably equivalent value received for the transfer.
