Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 34.40.010 (2026)
Invalidity generally
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 34.40.010. Invalidity generally.
Except as provided in AS 34.40.110, a conveyance or assignment, in writing or otherwise, of an estate or interest in land, or in goods, or things in action, or of rents or profits issuing from them or a charge upon land, goods, or things in action, or upon the rents or profits from them, made with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors or other persons of their lawful suits, damages, forfeitures, debts, or demands, or a bond or other evidence of debt given, action commenced, decree or judgment suffered, with the like intent, as against the persons so hindered, delayed, or defrauded is void.
Except as provided in AS 34.40.110, a conveyance or assignment, in writing or otherwise, of an estate or interest in land, or in goods, or things in action, or of rents or profits issuing from them or a charge upon land, goods, or things in action, or upon the rents or profits from them, made with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors or other persons of their lawful suits, damages, forfeitures, debts, or demands, or a bond or other evidence of debt given, action commenced, decree or judgment suffered, with the like intent, as against the persons so hindered, delayed, or defrauded is void.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1971–2022 · leading case: Gefre v. Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP, 306 P.3d 1264 (Alaska 2013).
Gefre v. Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP, 306 P.3d 1264 (Alaska 2013). “The Shareholders also argue that a direct fraudulent conveyance claim against DWT (under AS 34.40.010 9 ) specifically requires application of AS 09.”
Merdes & Merdes, P.C. v. Leisnoi, Inc., 410 P.3d 398 (Alaska 2017). “" 63 In reaching this decision we rejected the grantee's argument "that creditors' rights should be strictly limited to the remedy provided for by the Fraudulent Conveyances Act, AS 34.40.010." 64 But we required general creditors to "reduce their claims to judgment before…”
Shaffer v. Bellows, 260 P.3d 1064 (Alaska 2011). “The complaint contained five counts: (1) an action against all defendants for declaratory judgment; (2) an action against Bellows for breach of contract; (8) an action against Bellows for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (4) an action against all…”
Gabaig v. Gabaig, 717 P.2d 835 (Alaska 1986). “Did the Trial Court Clearly Err in Finding that the 1977 Conveyance to Schnell was Fraudulent? This case arose when Wife sued to set aside the 1977 conveyance of the Anchorage home.”
Summers v. Hagen, 852 P.2d 1165 (Alaska 1993). “Ha-gen asked the court to: (1) set aside Briske’s conveyances to Summers as fraudulent conveyances under the Alaska Fraudulent Conveyance Act, AS 34.40.010 et seq.; (2) enter a decree against the properties attaching Hagen’s judgment lien against Briske; and (3) award damages…”
Dean v. Firor, 681 P.2d 321 (Alaska 1984). “On July 3, 1980, Betty filed a complaint against Walter, Ellen Dean, and Firor Construction Company, citing the judgments in her favor for alimony arrearages and alleging that the conveyances of the Merrill and Lucas properties were fraudulent and therefore void pursuant to AS…”
First Nat'l Bank of Fairbanks v. Enzler, 537 P.2d 517 (Alaska 1975). “The primary question confronting us on this appeal is whether the transfer challenged here is to be rendered void as in violation of AS 34.40.010 which provides: A conveyance or assignment, in writing or otherwise, of an estate or interest in lands, or in goods, or things in…”
Blumenstein v. Phillips Ins. Ctr., Inc., 490 P.2d 1213 (Alaska 1971). “We turn next to the question whether the quitclaim deed delivered to Blumenstein by Martin Dredging should properly have been invalidated under Alaska’s law governing fraudulent conveyances.”
Nerox Power Sys., Inc. v. M-B Contracting Co., 54 P.3d 791 (Alaska 2002). “AS 34.40.010 states: Except as provided in AS 34.”
Pattee v. Pattee, 744 P.2d 658 (Alaska 1987). “We affirmed the trial court’s finding that the transfer was fraudulent and therefore void under AS 34.40.010. The key attribute of fraudulent conveyances is that they are made with the intent to defraud.”
Barstow v. Ingaldson Maasen & Fitzgerald, P.C. (In re Avery), 461 B.R. 798 (Bankr. D. Alaska 2011). “§ 548 (A)(1)(A), the sixth under AS 34.40.010, and the eighth under § 548(a)(l)(B)(ii)(IV).”
Rollins v. Leibold, 512 P.2d 937 (Alaska 1973). “AS 34.40.010 specifies that a conveyance of goods made with intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors or other persons is void.”
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.