Sec. 14. (a) A transfer made or an obligation incurred
by a debtor is voidable as to a creditor, whether the creditor's claim
arose before or after the transfer was made or the obligation was
incurred, if the debtor made the transfer or incurred the obligation:
(1) with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of
the debtor; or
(2) without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange
for the transfer or obligation, and the debtor:
(A) 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
(B) intended to incur or believed or reasonably should have
believed that the debtor would incur debts beyond the debtor's
ability to pay as the debts became due.
(b) In determining actual intent under subsection (a)(1),
consideration may be given, among other factors, to whether:
(1) the debtor retained possession or control of the property
transferred after the transfer;
(2) the transfer or obligation was disclosed or concealed;
(3) before the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred,
the debtor had been sued or threatened with suit;
(4) the transfer was of substantially all the debtor's assets;
(5) the debtor absconded;
(6) the debtor removed or concealed assets;
(7) the value of the consideration received by the debtor was
reasonably equivalent to the value of the asset transferred or the
amount of the obligation incurred;
(8) the debtor was insolvent or became insolvent shortly after the
transfer was made or the obligation was incurred; and
(9) the transfer occurred shortly before or shortly after a
substantial debt was incurred.
(c) A creditor making a claim for relief under this section has the
burden of proving the elements of the claim for relief by a
preponderance of the evidence.
[Pre-2002 Recodification Citation: 32-2-7-14.]
As added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.3. Amended by P.L.61-2017,
SEC.13.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
31
cases (
6 in the last 5 years), 2003–2025 · leading case:
Weintraut v. Comm'r, 2016 T.C. Memo. 142 (Tax Ct. 2016).
Weintraut v. Comm'r, 2016 T.C. Memo. 142 (Tax Ct. 2016).
· cites it 20× “Fankhauser in the SPR redemption transaction and the SPR sale transaction under the SPRA and (2) that those distributions or transfers were fraudulent under each of the two so-called constructive fraud provisions in Ind.”
Rose v. Mercantile Nat'l Bank of Hammond, 844 N.E.2d 1035 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 14× “Code § 32-18, 1 ercantile further asserted Jasper's transfer to Rose and Underwood of the proceeds from the sale of Jasper's assets was fraudulent pursuant to Ind. Code § 32-18-2-14 (1), Ind.Code § 32-18-2-14(2), 2 and Ind.”
Benjamin P. Ingram & Ben's Quarry, LLC v. Diamond Equip., Inc., 118 N.E.3d 1 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “Code § 32-18-2-14 , which governs fraudulent transfer, provided: A transfer made or an obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor's claim arose before or after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred, if the debtor made the…”
Boyer v. Crown Stock Distrib., Inc., 587 F.3d 787 (7th Cir. 2009).
· cites it 2× “The trustee in bankruptcy filed an adversary action charging the defendants — a defunct corporation and its shareholders, members of a family named Stroup — with having made a fraudulent conveyance in violation of Ind.Code § 32-18-2-14(2) (section 4(a)(2) of the Uniform…”
Hardy v. Hardy, 910 N.E.2d 851 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “See Ind.Code § 32-18-2-14 ("A debtor's conveyance of property is fraudulent as to a creditor if the debtor made the transfer with actual intent to defraud the creditor, or without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer.”
Lei Shi v. Cecilia Yi, 921 N.E.2d 31 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “Shi cites to Ind.Code § 32-18-2-14 but quotes the language from Ind.”
Rice v. Com'r, Ind. Dept. of Environ. Mgmt., 782 N.E.2d 1000 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Pursuant to I.C. § 32-18-2-14, a debtor's conveyance of property is fraudulent as to a creditor if the debtor made the transfer with actual intent to defraud the creditor, or without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer.”
Freeland v. Enodis Corp., 540 F.3d 721 (7th Cir. 2008).
“” Ind.Code § 32-18-2-14. “Proof of fraudulent intent need not be made by direct evidence under Indiana law” and can be inferred from the presence of certain “badges of fraud.”
Hoesman v. Sheffler, 886 N.E.2d 622 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Under Indiana Code section 32-18-2-14: A transfer made or an obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor’s claim arose before or after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred, if the debtor made the transfer or incurred the…”
— Ind. Code § 32-18-2-14(1) — 2 cases
Rose v. Mercantile Nat'l Bank of Hammond, 844 N.E.2d 1035 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006).
“Code § 32-18, 1 ercantile further asserted Jasper's transfer to Rose and Underwood of the proceeds from the sale of Jasper's assets was fraudulent pursuant to Ind. Code § 32-18-2-14 (1), Ind.Code § 32-18-2-14(2), 2 and Ind.”
— Ind. Code § 32-18-2-14(2) — 3 cases
Boyer v. Crown Stock Distrib., Inc., 587 F.3d 787 (7th Cir. 2009).
“The trustee in bankruptcy filed an adversary action charging the defendants — a defunct corporation and its shareholders, members of a family named Stroup — with having made a fraudulent conveyance in violation of Ind.Code § 32-18-2-14(2) (section 4(a)(2) of the Uniform…”
Rose v. Mercantile Nat'l Bank of Hammond, 844 N.E.2d 1035 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006).
“Code § 32-18, 1 ercantile further asserted Jasper's transfer to Rose and Underwood of the proceeds from the sale of Jasper's assets was fraudulent pursuant to Ind. Code § 32-18-2-14 (1), Ind.Code § 32-18-2-14(2), 2 and Ind.”
— Ind. Code § 32-18-2-14(a) — 1 case
— Ind. Code § 32-18-2-14(a)(1) — 1 case
— Ind. Code § 32-18-2-14(b) — 1 case
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.