Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 44
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-1002 (2026)

Insolvency

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. A debtor is insolvent if the sum of the debtor's debts is greater than all of the debtor's assets at a fair valuation.

B. A debtor who is generally not paying his debts as they become due is presumed to be insolvent.

C. A partnership is insolvent under subsection A if the sum of the partnership's debts is greater than the aggregate, at a fair valuation, of all of the partnership's assets and the sum of the excess of the value of each general partner's nonpartnership assets over the partner's nonpartnership debts.

D. Assets under this section do not include property that has been transferred, concealed or removed with intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors or that has been transferred in a manner making the transfer voidable under this article.

E. Debts under this section do not include an obligation to the extent it is secured by a valid lien on property of the debtor not included as an asset.

F. Debts under this section include the full amount of the debtor's potential liability under contracts of guarantee and surety. The assets of the debtor shall include a fair valuation of the rights of the debtor in connection with the contracts under indemnity or similar agreements and under equitable principles, including contribution and subrogation.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1969–2023 · leading case: Hullett v. Cousin, 63 P.3d 1029 (Ariz. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hullett v. Cousin, 63 P.3d 1029 (Ariz. 2003). · cites it 5× “Compare 11 U.S.C. § 101 (32)(B) (1997) (defining insolvent), § 101(12) (defining debt), § 101 (5) (A) (defining claim) and Unif.”
Oney v. Weinberg (In Re Wienberg), 410 B.R. 19 (9th Cir. BAP 2009). · cites it 3× “§ 10-140; see also A.R.S. § 44-1002(B): “A debtor who is generally not paying his debts as they become due is presumed to be insolvent.”
Transamerica Ins. v. Trout, 701 P.2d 851 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “Under A.R.S. § 44-1002, a person is insolvent for purposes of the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act when “the present fair salable value of his assets is less than the amount that will be required to pay his probable liability on his existing debts as they become absolute and…”
Premier Fin. Servs.. v. Citibank, 912 P.2d 1309 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 44-1002(B). On the same day Jacque Rosholm had received notice of the service of the writ of garnishment, the funds were withdrawn and placed beyond the reach of Judgment Creditor.”
GAF Corp. v. Diamond Carpet Corp., 572 P.2d 125 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 3× ““§ 44-1002. Insolvency A. A person is insolvent when the present fair salable value of his assets is less than the amount that will be required to pay his probable liability on his existing debts as they become absolute and matured.”
Hay v. Duskin, 455 P.2d 281 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 2× “The condition of being insolvent is defined in the Uniform *603 Fraudulent Conveyance Act, A.R.S. § 44-1002, and its existence can ultimately be ■determined only by a fact-and-figure balancing of assets and liabilities.”
Zellerbach Paper Co. v. Valley Nat'l Bank, 477 P.2d 550 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 2× “The statutory test for insolvency is found in A.R.S. § 44-1002, subsec. A. This statute provides that a person is insolvent when the present fair salable value of his assets is less than the amount that will be required to pay his probable liability on his existing debts as *434…”
Pierce v. Comm'r, 61 T.C. 424 (Tax Ct. 1974). “2d 281 (1969) , the Court of Appeals of Arizona held that a promise of future legal services is fair consideration within the meaning of the Arizona *195 version of the Uniform Act, identical in relevant sections to the California statute. Ariz. Rev. Stat.”
Kaufmann v. M & S Unlimited, L.L.C., 121 P.3d 181 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2005). “8 Gerald Hessler, the principal of GWH, admitted in his deposition that the company had no other assets at the time of the transfer, which resulted in GWH becoming insolvent.”
Hullett v. Cousin, 32 P.3d 44 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). “The relevant definition of “insolvent” is provided by § 44-1002(B), as follows: A partnership is insolvent under subsection A if the sum of the partnership’s debts is greater than the aggregate, at a fair valuation, of all of the partnership’s assets and the sum of the excess of…”
Slone v. Comm'r, 2016 T.C. Memo. 115 (2016). · cites it 2× “Factor 9: Debtor Insolvent or Became Insolvent Shortly After Transfer Was Made For purposes of the UFTA, "[a] debtor is insolvent if the sum of the debtor's debts is greater than all of the debtor's assets at a fair valuation.”
Guirguis v. Patel (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “¶10 Defendants’ forensic accountant testified that on January 27, 2016, Hanna withdrew $9,000 from the Bell Hotel bank account, leaving a balance of $28.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-1002(A) — 2 cases
Transamerica Ins. v. Trout, 701 P.2d 851 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). “Under A.R.S. § 44-1002, a person is insolvent for purposes of the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act when “the present fair salable value of his assets is less than the amount that will be required to pay his probable liability on his existing debts as they become absolute and…”
GAF Corp. v. Diamond Carpet Corp., 572 P.2d 125 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1977). ““§ 44-1002. Insolvency A. A person is insolvent when the present fair salable value of his assets is less than the amount that will be required to pay his probable liability on his existing debts as they become absolute and matured.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-1002(B) — 5 cases
Oney v. Weinberg (In Re Wienberg), 410 B.R. 19 (9th Cir. BAP 2009). “§ 10-140; see also A.R.S. § 44-1002(B): “A debtor who is generally not paying his debts as they become due is presumed to be insolvent.”
Premier Fin. Servs.. v. Citibank, 912 P.2d 1309 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995). “See A.R.S. § 44-1002(B). On the same day Jacque Rosholm had received notice of the service of the writ of garnishment, the funds were withdrawn and placed beyond the reach of Judgment Creditor.”
Hullett v. Cousin, 32 P.3d 44 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). “The relevant definition of “insolvent” is provided by § 44-1002(B), as follows: A partnership is insolvent under subsection A if the sum of the partnership’s debts is greater than the aggregate, at a fair valuation, of all of the partnership’s assets and the sum of the excess of…”
Guirguis v. Patel (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). “¶10 Defendants’ forensic accountant testified that on January 27, 2016, Hanna withdrew $9,000 from the Bell Hotel bank account, leaving a balance of $28.”
Downs v. Anderson (D. Ariz. 2023).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-1002(C) — 1 case
Hullett v. Cousin, 63 P.3d 1029 (Ariz. 2003). “Compare 11 U.S.C. § 101 (32)(B) (1997) (defining insolvent), § 101(12) (defining debt), § 101 (5) (A) (defining claim) and Unif.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-1002(a) — 1 case
Oney v. Weinberg (In Re Wienberg), 410 B.R. 19 (9th Cir. BAP 2009). “§ 10-140; see also A.R.S. § 44-1002(B): “A debtor who is generally not paying his debts as they become due is presumed to be insolvent.”
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.