Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 14
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 3579 (2026)

Defenses, liability and protection of transferee

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
1.  Transfer or obligation not voidable.  A transfer or obligation is not voidable under section 3575, subsection 1, paragraph A, against a person who took in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value or against any subsequent transferee or obligee.  
[PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
2.  Judgment.  Except as otherwise provided in this section, to the extent a transfer is voidable in an action by a creditor under section 3578, subsection 1, paragraph A, the creditor may recover judgment for the value of the asset transferred, as adjusted under subsection 3, or the amount necessary to satisfy the creditor's claim, whichever is less. The judgment may be entered against:  
A. The first transferee of the asset or the person for whose benefit the transfer was made; or   [PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
B. Any subsequent transferee other than a good-faith transferee or obligee who took for value or from any subsequent transferee or obligee.   [PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
[PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
3.  Value of asset.  If the judgment under subsection 2 is based upon the value of the asset transferred, the judgment must be for an amount equal to the value of the asset at the time of the transfer, subject to adjustment as the equities may require.  
[PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
4.  Rights of good-faith transferee or obligee.  Notwithstanding voidability of a transfer or an obligation under this Act, a good-faith transferee or obligee is entitled, to the extent of the value given the debtor for the transfer or obligation to:  
A. A lien on or a right to retain any interest in the asset transferred;   [PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
B. Enforcement of any obligation incurred; or   [PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
C. A reduction in the amount of the liability on the judgment.   [PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
[PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
5.  Defenses; lease termination and foreclosure of security interest.  A transfer is not voidable under section 3575, subsection 1, paragraph B, or section 3576, subsection 1, if the transfer results from:  
A. Termination of a lease upon default by the debtor when the termination is pursuant to the terms of the lease and applicable law; or   [PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
B. Enforcement of a security interest in compliance with the Uniform Commercial Code, Title 11, Article 9‑A.   [PL 1999, c. 699, Pt. D, §13 (AMD); PL 1999, c. 699, Pt. D, §30 (AFF).]
[PL 1999, c. 699, Pt. D, §13 (AMD); PL 1999, c. 699, Pt. D, §30 (AFF).]
6.  Defenses; insider transfers.  A transfer is not voidable under section 3576, subsection 2:  
A. To the extent the insider gave new value to or for the benefit of the debtor after the transfer was made unless the new value was secured by a valid lien;   [PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
B. If made in the ordinary course of business or financial affairs of the debtor and the insider; or   [PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
C. If made pursuant to a good-faith effort to rehabilitate the debtor and the transfer secured present value given for that purpose as well as an antecedent debt of the debtor.   [PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
[PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1985, c. 641, §3 (NEW). PL 1999, c. 699, §D13 (AMD). PL 1999, c. 699, §D30 (AFF).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases, 1995–2020 · leading case: Garrison City Broad., Inc. v. York Obstetrics & Gynecology, P.A., 2009 ME 124 (Me. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Garrison City Broad., Inc. v. York Obstetrics & Gynecology, P.A., 2009 ME 124 (Me. 2009). · cites it 8× “Although the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, on which Maine's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act is based, does not establish that every defense listed under section 8 (the equivalent of 14 M.R.S. § 3579 (2008)) is an affirmative defense, courts have extrapolated from comment 1…”
Samsara Mem'l Trust v. Kelly, Remmel & Zimmerman Kelly, Remmel & Zimmerman v. Raisin Mem'l Trust, 2014 ME 107 (Me. 2014). · cites it 2× “For the reasons set forth below, we agree that the statute does operate to limit Samsara’s liability in the manner advocated by the trusts, and we accordingly vacate the court’s award of damages against Samsara.”
Morin v. Dubois, 1998 ME 160 (Me. 1998). · cites it 2× “14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(2) provides that a creditor "may recover judgment for the value of the asset transferred .”
O'Donnell v. Royal Bus. Grp., Inc. (In Re Oxford Homes, Inc.), 180 B.R. 1 (Bankr. D. Me. 1995). · cites it 3× “14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(1). Good faith transferees are protected to the extent they gave value to a debtor.”
Off. Post Confirmation Comm. of Creditors Holding Unsecured Claims v. Markheim, 877 A.2d 155 (Me. 2005). · cites it 2× “See 14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(2). The Committee was required to present its evidence as to the amounts transferred to Anna in affidavits supporting its motion, and those affidavits had to set forth specific facts sufficient to warrant the required findings.”
Turner v. Phoenix Fin., LLC (In Re Imageset, Inc.), 299 B.R. 709 (Bankr. D. Me. 2003). “’s liability (for any of the transfers) must await resolution of, inter alia, Imageset’s insolvency, the defendants’ knowledge of its insolvency, and defendants’ entitlement to raise Maine law defenses, 14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(6) (“A transfer is not voidable under section 3576,…”
U.S. Bank v. Manning (Me. Super. Ct 2018). · cites it 3× “" 14 M.R.S.A. § 3579, Maine Comment 2. Because the Court awards avoidance of the transfer, an additional award of money damages against any transferee (i.”
Kelly, Remmel & Zimmerman v. Stone (Me. Super. Ct 2016). · cites it 2× “An exception to this rule is set out in 14 M.R.S. § 3579 for recovery against a transferee.”
Janvier v. Janvier (Me. Super. Ct 2017). “]" 4 14 M.R.S. § 3579(6) provides defenses to finding a transfer was fraudulent pursuant to the act when a transferee is an insider.”
O'Shea v. O'Shea (Me. Super. Ct 2020). “See 14 M.R.S. § 3579 (2)(B) (transferee subject to judgment under the Act unless transferee took as a bona fide purchaser).”
Huber v. Williams (Me. Super. Ct 2003). “Both Flick and Oak have moved to amend their answers to allege as affirmative defense that they each took their transfer in “good faith,” as recognized in 14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(1). Plaintiff Huber objects to these motions to amend as being untimely under the Scheduling Order and…”
Fore v. RJ Golf (Me. Super. Ct 2009). “by Hooded Merganser be transferred back "without encumbrance.”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 3579(1) — 2 cases
O'Donnell v. Royal Bus. Grp., Inc. (In Re Oxford Homes, Inc.), 180 B.R. 1 (Bankr. D. Me. 1995). “14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(1). Good faith transferees are protected to the extent they gave value to a debtor.”
Huber v. Williams (Me. Super. Ct 2003). “Both Flick and Oak have moved to amend their answers to allege as affirmative defense that they each took their transfer in “good faith,” as recognized in 14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(1). Plaintiff Huber objects to these motions to amend as being untimely under the Scheduling Order and…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 3579(2) — 3 cases
Samsara Mem'l Trust v. Kelly, Remmel & Zimmerman Kelly, Remmel & Zimmerman v. Raisin Mem'l Trust, 2014 ME 107 (Me. 2014). “For the reasons set forth below, we agree that the statute does operate to limit Samsara’s liability in the manner advocated by the trusts, and we accordingly vacate the court’s award of damages against Samsara.”
Morin v. Dubois, 1998 ME 160 (Me. 1998). “14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(2) provides that a creditor "may recover judgment for the value of the asset transferred .”
Off. Post Confirmation Comm. of Creditors Holding Unsecured Claims v. Markheim, 877 A.2d 155 (Me. 2005). “See 14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(2). The Committee was required to present its evidence as to the amounts transferred to Anna in affidavits supporting its motion, and those affidavits had to set forth specific facts sufficient to warrant the required findings.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 3579(2)(A) — 2 cases
Off. Post Confirmation Comm. of Creditors Holding Unsecured Claims v. Markheim, 877 A.2d 155 (Me. 2005). “See 14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(2). The Committee was required to present its evidence as to the amounts transferred to Anna in affidavits supporting its motion, and those affidavits had to set forth specific facts sufficient to warrant the required findings.”
Clark v. Brooks Woolen, Inc. (Me. Super. Ct 2000).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 3579(4) — 2 cases
O'Donnell v. Royal Bus. Grp., Inc. (In Re Oxford Homes, Inc.), 180 B.R. 1 (Bankr. D. Me. 1995). “14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(1). Good faith transferees are protected to the extent they gave value to a debtor.”
Fore v. RJ Golf (Me. Super. Ct 2009). “by Hooded Merganser be transferred back "without encumbrance.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 3579(6) — 2 cases
Turner v. Phoenix Fin., LLC (In Re Imageset, Inc.), 299 B.R. 709 (Bankr. D. Me. 2003). “’s liability (for any of the transfers) must await resolution of, inter alia, Imageset’s insolvency, the defendants’ knowledge of its insolvency, and defendants’ entitlement to raise Maine law defenses, 14 M.R.S.A. § 3579(6) (“A transfer is not voidable under section 3576,…”
Janvier v. Janvier (Me. Super. Ct 2017). “]" 4 14 M.R.S. § 3579(6) provides defenses to finding a transfer was fraudulent pursuant to the act when a transferee is an insider.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 3579(6)(B) — 1 case
Garrison City Broad., Inc. v. York Obstetrics & Gynecology, P.A., 2009 ME 124 (Me. 2009). “Although the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, on which Maine's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act is based, does not establish that every defense listed under section 8 (the equivalent of 14 M.R.S. § 3579 (2008)) is an affirmative defense, courts have extrapolated from comment 1…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 3579(6)(C) — 1 case
Garrison City Broad., Inc. v. York Obstetrics & Gynecology, P.A., 2009 ME 124 (Me. 2009). “Although the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, on which Maine's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act is based, does not establish that every defense listed under section 8 (the equivalent of 14 M.R.S. § 3579 (2008)) is an affirmative defense, courts have extrapolated from comment 1…”
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.