Kansas Statutes Annotated
K.S.A. § 33-204 (2026)
Transfers fraudulent as to present and future creditors
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
KS-LEGkslegislature.org
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
33-204. Transfers fraudulent as to present and future creditors. (a) A transfer made or 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 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 such debtor would incur, debts beyond such debtor's ability to pay as they became due.
(b) In determining actual intent under subsection (a)(1), consideration may be given, among other factors, to whether:
(1) The transfer or obligation was to an insider;
(2) the debtor retained possession or control of the property transferred after the transfer;
(3) the transfer or obligation was disclosed or concealed;
(4) before the transfer was made or obligation was incurred, 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 or the amount of the obligation incurred;
(9) the debtor was insolvent or became insolvent shortly after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred;
(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.
History: L. 1998, ch. 13, § 4; January 1, 1999.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 2002–2026 · leading case: McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002).
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002). “33-204(b) badges of fraud; (2) the transfers violated K.S.A. 33-204; and (3) the transfers made to the bank were voidable, although Shore claimed he took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value under K.”
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Shore (In Re Shore), 305 B.R. 559 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2004). “The state court held, and the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed, that Shore’s transfers, whether direct or indirect, were transfers made with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors and expressly avoidable under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 33-204 (a)(1) (2000). The state court…”
Leathers v. Leathers, 856 F.3d 729 (10th Cir. 2017). “Kan. Stat. Ann. § 33-204 (a)(l); accord 28 U.”
McCain Foods USA Inc. v. Shore (In Re Shore), 317 B.R. 536 (10th Cir. BAP 2004). “§ 33-205 (b) (2000) as transfers to insiders on account of antecedent debt while the transferor was insolvent and where the transferee knew or should have known of the insolvency; 2 and 2) the transfers violated the Kansas Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act, Kan. Stat. Ann. §…”
United States v. Krause (In Re Krause), 386 B.R. 785 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2008). “Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 33-204 and 33-205 are part of the Kansas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act.”
Redmond v. Gulf City Body & Trailer Works, Inc. (In Re Sunbridge Capital, Inc.), 454 B.R. 166 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2011). “§ 548 (a)(1)(B) and K.S.A. §§ 33-204(2) and 33-205(a), and recovery of avoided transfer pursuant to 11 U.”
Redmond v. Brooke Holdings, Inc. (In re Brooke Corp.), 515 B.R. 632 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2014). “The Complaint sought avoidance of preferential transfers under § 547 (Count I); avoidance of constructively fraudulent conveyances under § 548 and K.S.A. 33-204 and 33-205 (Count II); recovery of avoided transfers under § 550 (Count III); and disallowance of several proofs of…”
Redmond v. SpiritBank (In re Brooke Corp.), 541 B.R. 492 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2015). “33-208(a) provides that a “transfer or obligation is not voidable under subsection (a)(1) of K.S.A. 33-204 against a person who took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value.”
Redmond v. NCMIC Fin. Corp. (In re Brooke Corp.), 485 B.R. 650 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2013). “§§ 544 , 548(a)(1)(B), and 550 and K.S.A. 33-204(a)(2), 33-205(a), and 33-207.”
Wells Fargo Vendor Fin. Servs., LLC v. Nationwide Learning, LLC, 429 P.3d 221 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). “" K.S.A. 33-204(a)(1). It then lists 11 factors to apply "[i]n determining actual intent" under that subsection.”
Redmond v. NCMIC Fin. Corp. (In re Brooke Corp.), 568 B.R. 378 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2017). “33-208(a) provides that a “transfer or obligation is not voidable under subsection (a)(1) of K.S.A. 33-204 against a person who took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value.”
Redmond v. NCMIC Fin. Corp. (In re Brooke Corp.), 488 B.R. 459 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2013). “97 were transferred by Brooke Capital to NCMIC (via Aleritas) and were constructively fraudulent transfers under §§ 544 and 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code and under K.S.A. 33-204(a)(2) 6 and 33-205(a). Recovery from NCMIC is sought under Bankruptcy § 550 and K.”
— K.S.A. § 33-204(2) — 1 case
Redmond v. Gulf City Body & Trailer Works, Inc. (In Re Sunbridge Capital, Inc.), 454 B.R. 166 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2011). “§ 548 (a)(1)(B) and K.S.A. §§ 33-204(2) and 33-205(a), and recovery of avoided transfer pursuant to 11 U.”
— K.S.A. § 33-204(a) — 6 cases
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002). “33-204(b) badges of fraud; (2) the transfers violated K.S.A. 33-204; and (3) the transfers made to the bank were voidable, although Shore claimed he took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value under K.”
Harder v. Foster (Kan. Ct. App. 2017).
Dreymoor Fertilizers Overseas Pte. Ltd. v. Mikhailova (D. Kan. 2023).
Williamson TR v. Smith (Bankr. D. Kan. 2022).
— K.S.A. § 33-204(a)(1) — 9 cases
Wells Fargo Vendor Fin. Servs., LLC v. Nationwide Learning, LLC, 429 P.3d 221 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). “" K.S.A. 33-204(a)(1). It then lists 11 factors to apply "[i]n determining actual intent" under that subsection.”
Foxfield Villa Assocs. v. Robben (Kan. Ct. App. 2019).
Digit. Ally, Inc. v. Culp McAuley, Inc. (D. Kan. 2024).
Hamilton v. Bank of Flint Hills (Bankr. D. Kan. 2020).
— K.S.A. § 33-204(a)(2) — 10 cases
Redmond v. NCMIC Fin. Corp. (In re Brooke Corp.), 485 B.R. 650 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2013). “§§ 544 , 548(a)(1)(B), and 550 and K.S.A. 33-204(a)(2), 33-205(a), and 33-207.”
Redmond v. NCMIC Fin. Corp. (In re Brooke Corp.), 488 B.R. 459 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2013). “97 were transferred by Brooke Capital to NCMIC (via Aleritas) and were constructively fraudulent transfers under §§ 544 and 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code and under K.S.A. 33-204(a)(2) 6 and 33-205(a). Recovery from NCMIC is sought under Bankruptcy § 550 and K.”
Redmond v. Progressive Corp. (In re Brooke Corp.), 469 B.R. 68 (D. Kan. 2012).
Redmond v. Brooke Holdings, Inc. (In re Brooke Corp.), 515 B.R. 632 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2014). “The Complaint sought avoidance of preferential transfers under § 547 (Count I); avoidance of constructively fraudulent conveyances under § 548 and K.S.A. 33-204 and 33-205 (Count II); recovery of avoided transfers under § 550 (Count III); and disallowance of several proofs of…”
Redmond v. SpiritBank (In re Brooke Corp.), 541 B.R. 492 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2015). “33-208(a) provides that a “transfer or obligation is not voidable under subsection (a)(1) of K.S.A. 33-204 against a person who took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value.”
— K.S.A. § 33-204(a)(2)(A) — 1 case
Digit. Ally, Inc. v. Culp McAuley, Inc. (D. Kan. 2024).
— K.S.A. § 33-204(a)(l) — 2 cases
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002). “33-204(b) badges of fraud; (2) the transfers violated K.S.A. 33-204; and (3) the transfers made to the bank were voidable, although Shore claimed he took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value under K.”
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Shore (In Re Shore), 305 B.R. 559 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2004). “The state court held, and the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed, that Shore’s transfers, whether direct or indirect, were transfers made with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors and expressly avoidable under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 33-204 (a)(1) (2000). The state court…”
— K.S.A. § 33-204(b) — 9 cases
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002). “33-204(b) badges of fraud; (2) the transfers violated K.S.A. 33-204; and (3) the transfers made to the bank were voidable, although Shore claimed he took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value under K.”
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Shore (In Re Shore), 305 B.R. 559 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2004). “The state court held, and the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed, that Shore’s transfers, whether direct or indirect, were transfers made with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors and expressly avoidable under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 33-204 (a)(1) (2000). The state court…”
Wells Fargo Vendor Fin. Servs., LLC v. Nationwide Learning, LLC, 429 P.3d 221 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). “" K.S.A. 33-204(a)(1). It then lists 11 factors to apply "[i]n determining actual intent" under that subsection.”
Digit. Ally, Inc. v. Culp McAuley, Inc. (D. Kan. 2024).
Harder v. Foster (Kan. Ct. App. 2017).
— K.S.A. § 33-204(b)(1) — 4 cases
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002). “33-204(b) badges of fraud; (2) the transfers violated K.S.A. 33-204; and (3) the transfers made to the bank were voidable, although Shore claimed he took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value under K.”
Foxfield Villa Assocs. v. Robben (Kan. Ct. App. 2019).
Ross v. Jenkins (D. Kan. 2020).
— K.S.A. § 33-204(b)(2)(8) — 1 case
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002). “33-204(b) badges of fraud; (2) the transfers violated K.S.A. 33-204; and (3) the transfers made to the bank were voidable, although Shore claimed he took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value under K.”
— K.S.A. § 33-204(b)(4) — 2 cases
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002). “33-204(b) badges of fraud; (2) the transfers violated K.S.A. 33-204; and (3) the transfers made to the bank were voidable, although Shore claimed he took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value under K.”
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Shore (In Re Shore), 305 B.R. 559 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2004). “The state court held, and the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed, that Shore’s transfers, whether direct or indirect, were transfers made with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors and expressly avoidable under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 33-204 (a)(1) (2000). The state court…”
— K.S.A. § 33-204(b)(5) — 2 cases
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002). “33-204(b) badges of fraud; (2) the transfers violated K.S.A. 33-204; and (3) the transfers made to the bank were voidable, although Shore claimed he took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value under K.”
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Shore (In Re Shore), 305 B.R. 559 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2004). “The state court held, and the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed, that Shore’s transfers, whether direct or indirect, were transfers made with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors and expressly avoidable under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 33-204 (a)(1) (2000). The state court…”
— K.S.A. § 33-204(b)(7) — 1 case
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Shore (In Re Shore), 305 B.R. 559 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2004). “The state court held, and the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed, that Shore’s transfers, whether direct or indirect, were transfers made with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors and expressly avoidable under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 33-204 (a)(1) (2000). The state court…”
— K.S.A. § 33-204(b)(9) — 2 cases
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002). “33-204(b) badges of fraud; (2) the transfers violated K.S.A. 33-204; and (3) the transfers made to the bank were voidable, although Shore claimed he took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value under K.”
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Shore (In Re Shore), 305 B.R. 559 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2004). “The state court held, and the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed, that Shore’s transfers, whether direct or indirect, were transfers made with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors and expressly avoidable under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 33-204 (a)(1) (2000). The state court…”
— K.S.A. § 33-204(b)(l) — 2 cases
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Cent. Processors, Inc., 61 P.3d 68 (Kan. 2002). “33-204(b) badges of fraud; (2) the transfers violated K.S.A. 33-204; and (3) the transfers made to the bank were voidable, although Shore claimed he took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value under K.”
McCain Foods USA, Inc. v. Shore (In Re Shore), 305 B.R. 559 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2004). “The state court held, and the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed, that Shore’s transfers, whether direct or indirect, were transfers made with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors and expressly avoidable under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 33-204 (a)(1) (2000). The state court…”
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.