holding that under UFTA, any interest of the debtor that has value falls within the term “conveyance”
How later courts described this case
- holding that under UFTA, any interest of the debtor that has value falls within the term “conveyance”
- “[T]he property that plaintiff alleges to have been fraudulently conveyed—the inventory, equipment, customers, chemical formulas, product names, and goodwill . . . —are assets within the meaning of the statute because each has some value.”
- decisions from other states can guide the interpretation of uniform laws
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
White, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I dissent in part from the affirmance of the *383 grant of summary disposition because I believe there are genuine issues of material fact regarding plaintiffs claims concerning the period between June 1989 and the sale of assets to Rite-Made Chemical Company in November 1989. There was evidence that during this period R.M. Service Company, Inc., began manufacturing products using the same product formulas and names as Maintenance Research Laboratories, Inc., and began selling to Maintenance’s customers, although R.M. Service Company, Inc., never produced or sold these products before.
I would remand the case for further proceedings, including appropriate discovery, regarding the period beginning June 1989 and ending with the sale of assets to Rite-Made.
In all other respects, I concur in the majority opinion.