Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 566 / Act 434 of 1998
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34 (2026)

Transfer with intent to defraud.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

UNIFORM VOIDABLE TRANSACTIONS ACT


Act 434 of 1998


566.34 Transfer with intent to defraud.

Sec. 4.

    (1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (4), a transfer made or 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 in either of the following circumstances:

    (a) With actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of the debtor.

    (b) Without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer or obligation, and the debtor did either of the following:

    (i) 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.

    (ii) Intended to incur, or believed or reasonably should have believed that the debtor would incur, debts beyond the debtor's ability to pay as they became due.

    (2) In determining actual intent under subsection (1)(a) or (4), consideration may be given, among other factors, to whether 1 or more of the following occurred:

    (a) The transfer or obligation was to an insider.

    (b) The debtor retained possession or control of the property transferred after the transfer.

    (c) The transfer or obligation was disclosed or concealed.

    (d) Before the transfer was made or obligation was incurred, the debtor had been sued or threatened with suit.

    (e) The transfer was of substantially all of the debtor's assets.

    (f) The debtor absconded.

    (g) The debtor removed or concealed assets.

    (h) 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.

    (i) The debtor was insolvent or became insolvent shortly after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred.

    (j) The transfer occurred shortly before or shortly after a substantial debt was incurred.

    (k) The debtor transferred the essential assets of the business to a lienor that transferred the assets to an insider of the debtor.

    (3) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (4), a creditor that makes a claim for relief under subsection (1) has the burden of proving the elements of the claim for relief by a preponderance of the evidence.

    (4) A qualified disposition is fraudulent as to the creditor whose claim arose after the qualified disposition only if the qualified disposition was made with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of the debtor. With respect to a qualified disposition, a creditor has the burden of proving the elements of the claim for relief by clear and convincing evidence.

    

    

History: 1998, Act 434, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 1998 ;-- Am. 2016, Act 331, Eff. Mar. 8, 2017 ;-- Am. 2016, Act 552, Eff. Apr. 10, 2017 ;-- Am. 2022, Act 145, Imd. Eff. July 19, 2022

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 108 cases (39 in the last 5 years), 2002–2026 · leading case: Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008). · cites it 21× “” 4 MCL 566.34(1) states in relevant part: 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…”
Gold v. Winget (In Re NM Holdings Co.), 407 B.R. 232 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2009). · cites it 32× “§§ 544 *244 and 550, and Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §§ 566.34 , 566.35, and 566.”
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 19× “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
Estes v. Titus, 731 N.W.2d 119 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 26× “Plaintiff contended that defendant's transfer of marital property to Julie pursuant to the divorce judgment was fraudulent with respect to the plaintiff under MCL 566.34 and 566.35 because the property settlement was made with the actual intent to defraud plaintiff, was made…”
Ryan Racing, LLC v. Gentilozzi, 231 F. Supp. 3d 269 (W.D. Mich. 2017). · cites it 12× “” Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.37 (1)(a). A transfer of assets is fraudulent as to a creditor if the transfer is made: “[w]ith actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of the debtor.”
Wells v. Sleep (In Re Michigan Mach. Tool Control Corp.), 381 B.R. 657 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2008). · cites it 14× “§ 544 , Count I seeks recovery of alleged fraudulent transfers under Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 566.34 and 566.35. Count II seeks recovery of the transfers as unauthorized distributions to shareholders under Mich.”
Gold v. Marquette Univ. (In Re Leonard), 454 B.R. 444 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2011). · cites it 10× “First, the Trustee alleges that the transfers were made with “actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud” Debtors’ creditors, and that the transfers are therefore avoidable under § 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code and under Michigan’s fraudulent transfer statutes, Mich. Comp.…”
Meoli v. Huntington Nat'l Bank (In Re Teleservices Grp., Inc.), 444 B.R. 767 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2011). · cites it 6× “, Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34 . Of course, Trustee will also have to establish Section 544(b)(l)’s separate requirement that the Teleservices estate has at least one unsecured creditor whose claim was in existence at the time of these earlier transfers.”
Helena Agri-Enter., LLC v. Great Lakes Grain, LLC, 988 F.3d 260 (6th Cir. 2021). · cites it 2× “; see also Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 566.34 (1)(a), 566.35(1).”
In Re Nm Holdings Co., LLC, 405 B.R. 830 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2008). · cites it 24× “See Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 566.34 (1)(b). Unless he is time barred, Gold may assert fraudulent transfer claims under the Michigan statute through § 544(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, which provides: (b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the trustee may avoid any transfer…”
Meoli v. Huntington Nat'l Bank (In Re Teleservices Grp., Inc.), 469 B.R. 713 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2012). · cites it 5× “§ 548 (a)(1) and Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34 ; (2) Cyberco did not receive any of these transfers in good faith, 11 U.”
Gold v. Deloitte & Touche, LLP (In re NM Holdings Co.), 405 B.R. 830 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2008). · cites it 24× “See Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 566.34 (l)(b). Unless he is time barred, Gold may assert fraudulent transfer claims under the Michigan statute through § 544(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, which provides: (b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the trustee may avoid any transfer…”
Show all 108 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(1) — 22 cases
Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008). “” 4 MCL 566.34(1) states in relevant part: 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…”
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
Estes v. Titus, 731 N.W.2d 119 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff contended that defendant's transfer of marital property to Julie pursuant to the divorce judgment was fraudulent with respect to the plaintiff under MCL 566.34 and 566.35 because the property settlement was made with the actual intent to defraud plaintiff, was made…”
Wells v. Sleep (In Re Michigan Mach. Tool Control Corp.), 381 B.R. 657 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2008). “§ 544 , Count I seeks recovery of alleged fraudulent transfers under Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 566.34 and 566.35. Count II seeks recovery of the transfers as unauthorized distributions to shareholders under Mich.”
Madden v. Morelli (In re Energy Conversion Devices, Inc.), 548 B.R. 208 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2016).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(1)(a) — 33 cases
Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008). “” 4 MCL 566.34(1) states in relevant part: 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…”
Estes v. Titus, 731 N.W.2d 119 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff contended that defendant's transfer of marital property to Julie pursuant to the divorce judgment was fraudulent with respect to the plaintiff under MCL 566.34 and 566.35 because the property settlement was made with the actual intent to defraud plaintiff, was made…”
Stephen Swirple v. Mgm Grand Detroit LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
Caldwell Co. v. Yousif (E.D. Mich. 2025).
Rpad LLC v. Salvatore Dinoto (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(1)(b) — 11 cases
Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008). “” 4 MCL 566.34(1) states in relevant part: 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…”
Caldwell Co. v. Yousif (E.D. Mich. 2025).
Gold v. Chaaban (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2020).
Gold v. Wall, Sr. (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2024).
Stuart A. Gold, Tr. v. Dorothy E. McLemore Trust (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2025).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(1)(b)(i) — 1 case
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Max Rehab Physical Therapy, LLC, Maximum Rehab Physical Therapy, LLC, Joseph Labib, & Renee Labib (E.D. Mich. 2026).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2) — 23 cases
Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008). “” 4 MCL 566.34(1) states in relevant part: 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…”
Estes v. Titus, 731 N.W.2d 119 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff contended that defendant's transfer of marital property to Julie pursuant to the divorce judgment was fraudulent with respect to the plaintiff under MCL 566.34 and 566.35 because the property settlement was made with the actual intent to defraud plaintiff, was made…”
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
Gold v. Winget (In Re NM Holdings Co.), 407 B.R. 232 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2009). “§§ 544 *244 and 550, and Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §§ 566.34 , 566.35, and 566.”
Meoli v. Huntington Nat'l Bank (In Re Teleservices Grp., Inc.), 444 B.R. 767 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2011). “, Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34 . Of course, Trustee will also have to establish Section 544(b)(l)’s separate requirement that the Teleservices estate has at least one unsecured creditor whose claim was in existence at the time of these earlier transfers.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(A) — 2 cases
Kenneth W Burke v. Anthony Leo Maurer (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
Kenneth W Burke v. Anthony Leo Maurer (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(a) — 11 cases
Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008). “” 4 MCL 566.34(1) states in relevant part: 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…”
Estes v. Titus, 731 N.W.2d 119 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff contended that defendant's transfer of marital property to Julie pursuant to the divorce judgment was fraudulent with respect to the plaintiff under MCL 566.34 and 566.35 because the property settlement was made with the actual intent to defraud plaintiff, was made…”
Morland Prop. Servs. LLC v. J J Dev. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
20241218_C369545_41_369545.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
Shannon M Hartwick v. Clarissa De Luna (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(b) — 5 cases
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
Morland Prop. Servs. LLC v. J J Dev. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
20241218_C369545_41_369545.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
Shannon M Hartwick v. Clarissa De Luna (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
City of Riverview v. Forest Island Recycling II Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(c) — 3 cases
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
Morland Prop. Servs. LLC v. J J Dev. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
20241218_C369545_41_369545.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(d) — 10 cases
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
Estes v. Titus, 731 N.W.2d 119 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff contended that defendant's transfer of marital property to Julie pursuant to the divorce judgment was fraudulent with respect to the plaintiff under MCL 566.34 and 566.35 because the property settlement was made with the actual intent to defraud plaintiff, was made…”
Morland Prop. Servs. LLC v. J J Dev. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
Glen Schilkey v. Prosper Mgmt. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
Kenneth W Burke v. Anthony Leo Maurer (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(e) — 8 cases
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
Estes v. Titus, 731 N.W.2d 119 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff contended that defendant's transfer of marital property to Julie pursuant to the divorce judgment was fraudulent with respect to the plaintiff under MCL 566.34 and 566.35 because the property settlement was made with the actual intent to defraud plaintiff, was made…”
Kenneth W Burke v. Anthony Leo Maurer (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
Kenneth W Burke v. Anthony Leo Maurer (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
Glen Schilkey v. Prosper Mgmt. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(f) — 2 cases
Morland Prop. Servs. LLC v. J J Dev. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
20241218_C369545_41_369545.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(g) — 2 cases
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
20241218_C369545_41_369545.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(h) — 9 cases
Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008). “” 4 MCL 566.34(1) states in relevant part: 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…”
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
Morland Prop. Servs. LLC v. J J Dev. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
Glen Schilkey v. Prosper Mgmt. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
Kenneth W Burke v. Anthony Leo Maurer (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(i) — 8 cases
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
Estes v. Titus, 731 N.W.2d 119 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff contended that defendant's transfer of marital property to Julie pursuant to the divorce judgment was fraudulent with respect to the plaintiff under MCL 566.34 and 566.35 because the property settlement was made with the actual intent to defraud plaintiff, was made…”
Glen Schilkey v. Prosper Mgmt. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
Kenneth W Burke v. Anthony Leo Maurer (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
Kenneth W Burke v. Anthony Leo Maurer (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(j) — 3 cases
Morland Prop. Servs. LLC v. J J Dev. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
Glen Schilkey v. Prosper Mgmt. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
20241218_C369545_41_369545.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(2)(k) — 4 cases
Kenneth W Burke v. Anthony Leo Maurer (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
Kenneth W Burke v. Anthony Leo Maurer (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
Morland Prop. Servs. LLC v. J J Dev. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
20241218_C369545_41_369545.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(3) — 2 cases
20241218_C369545_41_369545.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Max Rehab Physical Therapy, LLC, Maximum Rehab Physical Therapy, LLC, Joseph Labib, & Renee Labib (E.D. Mich. 2026).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(4) — 2 cases
Morland Prop. Servs. LLC v. J J Dev. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
Izzo Golf, Inc. f/k/a Dancorp Investors, Inc. v. Weber (E.D. Mich. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(a) — 1 case
20241218_C369545_41_369545.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(b) — 1 case
20241218_C369545_41_369545.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(l)(a) — 7 cases
Dillard v. Schlussel, 865 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Considerable record evidence supports that Mark transferred assets to Rose Lynn intending to hinder, delay, or defraud Dillard’s collection of her judgment, establishing an actually fraudulent transfer under MCL 566.”
Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008). “” 4 MCL 566.34(1) states in relevant part: 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…”
Wells v. Sleep (In Re Michigan Mach. Tool Control Corp.), 381 B.R. 657 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2008). “§ 544 , Count I seeks recovery of alleged fraudulent transfers under Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 566.34 and 566.35. Count II seeks recovery of the transfers as unauthorized distributions to shareholders under Mich.”
Estes v. Titus, 731 N.W.2d 119 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff contended that defendant's transfer of marital property to Julie pursuant to the divorce judgment was fraudulent with respect to the plaintiff under MCL 566.34 and 566.35 because the property settlement was made with the actual intent to defraud plaintiff, was made…”
Richardson v. Huntington Nat'l Bank (In Re Cyberco Holdings, Inc.), 382 B.R. 118 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2008).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.34(l)(b) — 3 cases
Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008). “” 4 MCL 566.34(1) states in relevant part: 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…”
Wells v. Sleep (In Re Michigan Mach. Tool Control Corp.), 381 B.R. 657 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2008). “§ 544 , Count I seeks recovery of alleged fraudulent transfers under Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 566.34 and 566.35. Count II seeks recovery of the transfers as unauthorized distributions to shareholders under Mich.”
Wells v. Salmo (In re Select One, Inc.), 556 B.R. 826 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2013).
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.