Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 8-9A-4 (2026)
Transfers Fraudulent as to Present and Future Creditors.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
(a) A transfer made by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor’s claim arose before or after the transfer was made, if the debtor made the transfer with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of the debtor.
(b) In determining actual intent under subsection (a), consideration may be given, among other factors, to whether:
(1) The transfer was to an insider;
(2) The debtor retained possession or control of the property transferred after the transfer;
(3) The transfer was disclosed or concealed;
(4) Before the transfer was made the debtor had been sued or threatened with suit;
(5) The transfer was of substantially all the debtor’s assets;
(6) The debtor absconded;
(7) The debtor removed or concealed assets;
(8) The value of the consideration received by the debtor was reasonably equivalent to the value of the asset transferred;
(9) The debtor was insolvent or became insolvent shortly after the transfer was made;
(10) The transfer occurred shortly before or shortly after a substantial debt was incurred; and
(11) The debtor transferred the essential assets of the business to a lienor who transferred the assets to an insider of the debtor.
(c) A transfer made by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor’s claim arose before or after the transfer was made, if the debtor made the transfer without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer and the debtor:
(1) Was engaged or was about to engage in a business or a transaction for which the remaining assets of the debtor were unreasonably small in relation to the business or transaction; or
(2) Intended to incur, or believed or reasonably should have believed that he or she would incur, debts beyond his or her ability to pay as they became due.
(Acts 1989, No. 89-793, p. 1585, §4.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 49
cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1994–2023 · leading case: Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002).
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
SE Prop. Holdings, LLC v. Braswell, 255 F. Supp. 3d 1187 (S.D. Ala. 2017). “In Count One, SEPH brings a claim of actual fraudulent transfer, in violation of, Alabama Code § 8-9A-4(a), based on allegations that Braswell'made the subject transfers with the intent of hindering, delaying or defrauding SEPH’s predecessor.”
THOMPSON PROP. v. Birmingham Hide & Tallow, 897 So. 2d 248 (Ala. 2004). “[2] Hide analogizes that rationale to the instant case to say that although the Partnerships have stated facts that show Rockhill's conduct matched some of the qualifications listed in § 8-9A-4, Hide has presented evidence to the contrary, and that § 8-9A-4(b) begins by stating…”
Andrews v. RBL, L.L.C. (In re Vista Bella, Inc.), 511 B.R. 163 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2014). “As to actual fraud, Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a) states that “[a] transfer made by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor’s claim arose before or after the transfer was made, if the debtor made the transfer with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any…”
Aliant Bank v. Davis, 198 So. 3d 508 (Ala. Civ. App. 2015). “’ Ala.Code 1975, § 8-9A-4(a). The trial court considers several factors in determining whether the debtor possessed the requisite intent, including to whom the transfer was made, the amount of assets transferred, and the financial condition of the debtor before and after the…”
Wood v. Hayes, 104 So. 3d 863 (Ala. 2012). “” Ala.Code 1975, § 8-9A-4, Comment 3. This Court has explained: “An existing creditor seeking to set aside a conveyance may do so because of either actual fraud or constructive fraud.”
Cox v. Hughes, 781 So. 2d 197 (Ala. 2000). “Compare Ala.Code 1975, § 8-9A-4, and the comments thereto, with Granberry v.”
Ex Parte Progressive Specialty Ins. Co., 31 So. 3d 661 (Ala. 2009). “Specifically, the Bank alleged claims under the Alabama Fraudulent Transfer Act, Ala. Code 1975, §§ 8-9A-4 and -5, and asserted that three parcels of real estatetwo of which had been owned by Vakili and one of which had been owned jointly by Vakili and Marjanhad been…”
McPherson Oil Co., Inc. v. Massey, 643 So. 2d 595 (Ala. 1994). “In determining actual intent under subsection (a), the trial court may consider a number of factors, such as whether the transfer was to an insider, whether the transfer was of substantially all of the debtor's assets, and whether the debtor was insolvent or became insolvent…”
Peacock Timber Transp., Inc. v. B.P. Holdings, LLC, 115 So. 3d 914 (Ala. 2012). “Concerning the statute-of-limitations issue, Peacock argued that it brought its AFTA action pursuant to § 8-9A-4, Ala. Code 1975, not § 8-9A-5(b), as Blount alleged.”
Hart v. Pugh, 878 So. 2d 1150 (Ala. 2003). “) In support of her argument, Kay relies on Ala.Code 1975, § 8-9A-4, which provides, in pertinent part: “(a) A transfer made by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor’s claim arose before or after the transfer was made, if the debtor made the transfer with…”
Russell v. Russell, 758 So. 2d 533 (Ala. 1999). “See Ala.Code 1975, §§ 8-9A-4 and -5. However, the record gives no indication that Mrs.”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(a) — 33 cases
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
SE Prop. Holdings, LLC v. Braswell, 255 F. Supp. 3d 1187 (S.D. Ala. 2017). “In Count One, SEPH brings a claim of actual fraudulent transfer, in violation of, Alabama Code § 8-9A-4(a), based on allegations that Braswell'made the subject transfers with the intent of hindering, delaying or defrauding SEPH’s predecessor.”
Andrews v. RBL, L.L.C. (In re Vista Bella, Inc.), 511 B.R. 163 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2014). “As to actual fraud, Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a) states that “[a] transfer made by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor’s claim arose before or after the transfer was made, if the debtor made the transfer with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any…”
Aliant Bank v. Davis, 198 So. 3d 508 (Ala. Civ. App. 2015). “’ Ala.Code 1975, § 8-9A-4(a). The trial court considers several factors in determining whether the debtor possessed the requisite intent, including to whom the transfer was made, the amount of assets transferred, and the financial condition of the debtor before and after the…”
THOMPSON PROP. v. Birmingham Hide & Tallow, 897 So. 2d 248 (Ala. 2004). “[2] Hide analogizes that rationale to the instant case to say that although the Partnerships have stated facts that show Rockhill's conduct matched some of the qualifications listed in § 8-9A-4, Hide has presented evidence to the contrary, and that § 8-9A-4(b) begins by stating…”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b) — 12 cases
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
THOMPSON PROP. v. Birmingham Hide & Tallow, 897 So. 2d 248 (Ala. 2004). “[2] Hide analogizes that rationale to the instant case to say that although the Partnerships have stated facts that show Rockhill's conduct matched some of the qualifications listed in § 8-9A-4, Hide has presented evidence to the contrary, and that § 8-9A-4(b) begins by stating…”
Andrews v. RBL, L.L.C. (In re Vista Bella, Inc.), 511 B.R. 163 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2014). “As to actual fraud, Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a) states that “[a] transfer made by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor’s claim arose before or after the transfer was made, if the debtor made the transfer with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any…”
Aliant Bank v. Davis, 198 So. 3d 508 (Ala. Civ. App. 2015). “’ Ala.Code 1975, § 8-9A-4(a). The trial court considers several factors in determining whether the debtor possessed the requisite intent, including to whom the transfer was made, the amount of assets transferred, and the financial condition of the debtor before and after the…”
Int'l Mgmt. Grp., Inc. v. Bryant Bank, 274 So. 3d 1003 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(1) — 6 cases
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
Cox v. Hughes, 781 So. 2d 197 (Ala. 2000). “Compare Ala.Code 1975, § 8-9A-4, and the comments thereto, with Granberry v.”
Holsombeck v. USAmeriBank, 264 So. 3d 91 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
Int'l Mgmt. Grp., Inc. v. Bryant Bank, 274 So. 3d 1003 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
Holsombeck v. USAmeriBank, 264 So. 3d 91 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(10) — 3 cases
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
Holsombeck v. USAmeriBank, 264 So. 3d 91 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
Holsombeck v. USAmeriBank, 264 So. 3d 91 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(11) — 1 case
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(2) — 3 cases
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
Holsombeck v. USAmeriBank, 264 So. 3d 91 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
Holsombeck v. USAmeriBank, 264 So. 3d 91 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(3) — 1 case
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(4) — 1 case
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(5) — 1 case
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(6) — 1 case
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(7) — 1 case
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(8) — 3 cases
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
Int'l Mgmt. Grp., Inc. v. Bryant Bank, 274 So. 3d 1003 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
Int'l Mgmt. Grp., Inc. v. Bryant Bank, 274 So. 3d 1003 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(9) — 1 case
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(b)(l) — 1 case
Andrews v. RBL, L.L.C. (In re Vista Bella, Inc.), 511 B.R. 163 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2014). “As to actual fraud, Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a) states that “[a] transfer made by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor’s claim arose before or after the transfer was made, if the debtor made the transfer with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any…”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(c) — 12 cases
SE Prop. Holdings, LLC v. Braswell, 255 F. Supp. 3d 1187 (S.D. Ala. 2017). “In Count One, SEPH brings a claim of actual fraudulent transfer, in violation of, Alabama Code § 8-9A-4(a), based on allegations that Braswell'made the subject transfers with the intent of hindering, delaying or defrauding SEPH’s predecessor.”
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
Wood v. Hayes, 104 So. 3d 863 (Ala. 2012). “” Ala.Code 1975, § 8-9A-4, Comment 3. This Court has explained: “An existing creditor seeking to set aside a conveyance may do so because of either actual fraud or constructive fraud.”
Cox v. Hughes, 781 So. 2d 197 (Ala. 2000). “Compare Ala.Code 1975, § 8-9A-4, and the comments thereto, with Granberry v.”
Peacock Timber Transp., Inc. v. B.P. Holdings, LLC, 115 So. 3d 914 (Ala. 2012). “Concerning the statute-of-limitations issue, Peacock argued that it brought its AFTA action pursuant to § 8-9A-4, Ala. Code 1975, not § 8-9A-5(b), as Blount alleged.”
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(c)(2) — 2 cases
SE Prop. Holdings, LLC v. Braswell, 255 F. Supp. 3d 1187 (S.D. Ala. 2017). “In Count One, SEPH brings a claim of actual fraudulent transfer, in violation of, Alabama Code § 8-9A-4(a), based on allegations that Braswell'made the subject transfers with the intent of hindering, delaying or defrauding SEPH’s predecessor.”
Am. Nat'l Red Cross v. ASD Specialty Health Care, Inc., 325 F. Supp. 2d 1322 (S.D. Ala. 2002).
— Ala. Code § 8-9A-4(e) — 3 cases
SE Prop. Holdings, LLC v. Braswell, 255 F. Supp. 3d 1187 (S.D. Ala. 2017). “In Count One, SEPH brings a claim of actual fraudulent transfer, in violation of, Alabama Code § 8-9A-4(a), based on allegations that Braswell'made the subject transfers with the intent of hindering, delaying or defrauding SEPH’s predecessor.”
Premier Capital Funding, Inc. v. Earle (In Re Earle), 307 B.R. 276 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002). “PCF contends that debtor Mary Earle fraudulently transferred certain real property to a trust “with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors in violation of Ala.Code § 8-9A-4(a).” (Complaint, ¶ 7). The debtors’ children are trustees of the trust at issue.”
Peacock Timber Transp., Inc. v. B.P. Holdings, LLC, 115 So. 3d 914 (Ala. 2012). “Concerning the statute-of-limitations issue, Peacock argued that it brought its AFTA action pursuant to § 8-9A-4, Ala. Code 1975, not § 8-9A-5(b), as Blount alleged.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.