Ind. Code § 32-18-2-15
Transfers voidable as to present creditors; creditor's burden of proof
Sec. 15. (a) A transfer made or an obligation incurred by a debtor is voidable as to a creditor whose claim arose before the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred if:
(1) the debtor made the transfer or incurred the obligation without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer or obligation; and
(2) the debtor:
(A) was insolvent at that time; or
(B) became insolvent as a result of the transfer or obligation.
(b) Subject to section 12(d) of this chapter, 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: 32-2-7-15.]
As added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.3. Amended by P.L.61-2017, SEC.14.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: Weintraut v. Comm'r
Weintraut v. Comm'r (2016)
“Transfers for Purposes of the Indiana UFTA With respect to the SPR redemption transaction under the SPRA, respondent argues that for purposes of the Indiana UFTA in form and in substance FFI made a distribution or transfer of its property, namely, a proportionate ownership…”
Lei Shi v. Cecilia Yi (2010)
“Both counts appear to raise a cause of action under Ind.Code § 32-18-2-15, 4 which provides: *36 A transfer made or an obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor whose claim arose before the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred if: (1) the debtor…”
Dfs Secured Healthcare Receivables Trust v. Caregivers Great Lakes, Inc. And Marc Leestma (2004)
“Ind.Code § 32-18-2-15 (emphasis added). Although DFS did not receive a court judgment until after the asset transfer, the court judgment simply made official the obligation with respect to which DFS had been trying to recover long before the asset transfer.”
Continental Casualty Co. v. Symons (2016)
“Ind.Code § 32-18-2-15. Continental’s claim arose before the sale to Acceptance closed on June 6, 2001, and the judge found that IGF was insolvent at the time of the sale.”
The Nostalgia Network, Inc. v. Bonnie M. Lockwood (2002)
“Nostalgia then brought the present suit in Illinois, where Rayle and Lockwood live, seeking the difference ($307,000) between the amount that Rayle had transferred to Lockwood without consideration ($343,000) and the amount Nostalgia had recovered in the Indiana action ($36,000).”
Rose v. Mercantile National Bank of Hammond (2006)
“Ind.Code § 32-18-2-15 states as follows: A transfer made or an obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor whose claim arose before the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred if: (1) the debtor made the transfer or incurred the obligation without…”
Gibson v. Tucker (In re G & S Livestock Co.) (2012)
“§ 544 (b) and Indiana Code § 32-18-2-15. [Dkt. 14-6 at 10.”
Freeland v. CPA Warehouse (In re Livemercial Aviation Holding, LLC) (2014)
“Paragraph 2 requests a money judgment against the defendants “under Section 548 and Ind.Code § 32-18-2-15.” From the foregoing, it’s possible to postulate that the amended complaint asserts four possible grounds for relief: (1) 11 U.”
United States v. WITKEMPER (2021)
“" Ind. Code §§ 32-18-2-15 (a)(1)–(2) (emphasis added).”
Princeton Alternative Income Fund LP v. Wolfe (2022)
“The ITFA also provides that transfers are also voidable if the claim arose before the transfer and the debtor made the transfer without receiving reasonably equivalent value and the debtor was insolvent at the time or became insolvent as a result of the transfer. Ind. Code. §…”
DeLaney v. S&C Financial Group LLC (2025)
“Trustee has established that the estate received less than reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Property and all other elements necessary for avoidance of the transfer under § 548 and Ind. Code § 32-18-2-15 . Remedies It is the Court’s intention by this Entry to…”
Princeton Alternative Income Fund LP v. Wolfe (2024)
“§ 32-18-2-15. If Raviv was domiciled in Indiana in March 2017, then the Vernon Woods Property was exempt from satisfying Raviv’s debts, and the transfer was not fraudulent.”
— Ind. Code § 32-18-2-15(b) — 1 case
United States v. WITKEMPER (2021)
“" Ind. Code §§ 32-18-2-15 (a)(1)–(2) (emphasis added).”
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.