Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 513. AGREEMENTS RELATING TO PROPERTY
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (2026)

Transfer Or Obligation Voidable As To Present Or Future Creditor

✓ current as of May 2026 Cite as: Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) 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:

(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:

(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; or

(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.

(b) In determining actual intent under paragraph (a), clause (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 that transferred the assets to an insider of the debtor.

(c) A creditor making a claim under paragraph (a) has the burden of proving the elements of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 117 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case: Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn · cites it 59× “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
Finn v. Alliance Bank (2015) minn · cites it 48× “” Rather, MUFTA addresses a “transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor,” Minn. Stat. §§ 513.44 (a), 513.45(a), which indicates that the focus of the statute is on individual transfers, rather than a pattern of transactions that are part of a greater “scheme.”
Stoebner v. Ritchie Capital Management, L.L.C. (In re Polaroid Corp.) (2012) mnb · cites it 26× “Minn.Stat. § 513.44.(b)(8): Lack of Reasonably Equivalent Value for Transfer.”
Citizens State Bank of Hayfield v. Leth (1990) minnctapp · cites it 28× “On May 31, 1989, the trial court declared the transfer void as violative of Minn.Stat. § 513.44 and thus subject to all liens incurred prior to the May 1984 transfer.”
Stoebner v. Opportunity Finance, LLC (2016) mnd · cites it 25× “Minn. Stat. § 513.44 . a. Debtor Entity Represented by the Trustee In the Order, the Bankruptcy Court found that both the Trustee and the alleged creditors lacked standing.”
In re Petters Company, Inc. (2013) mnb · cites it 16× “lack of reasonable equivalent value received by the Debtor-transferor for the property transferred, Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b)(8). 42 The plausibility of the Trustee’s badges-based pleading is not quite as powerful for employee-defendants as it is for creditor-defendants.”
Leonard v. Norman Vinitsky Residuary Trust (In Re Jolly's, Inc.) (1995) mnb · cites it 28× “In Counts I and II of his complaint, the Plaintiff seeks to have the transfer of this security interest avoided as a fraudulent transfer within the scope of Minn.Stat. §§ 513.44 and 513.45. *836 In Count VI of his complaint, the Plaintiff seeks judgment against SEI in collection…”
Finn v. Alliance Bank (2013) minnctapp · cites it 29× “The receiver’s complaint brought, relevant to this appeal, four claims against Alliance and respondent banks: (1) that the payments made by First United to Alliance and respondent banks were voidable as actually fraudulent transfers, under Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (a)(1); (2) that…”
Addison v. Seaver (2008) ca8 · cites it 10× “” Minn.Stat. Ann. § 513.44; see also Sholdan II, 217 F.”
Ritchie Capital Management v. John Stoebner (2015) ca8 · cites it 10× “§ 548 (a); Minn.Stat. § 513.44(a). In a case that involves numerous entities, it is important to identify precisely whose intent is relevant to the consideration of fraudulent intent.”
In re Petters Co. (2013) mnb · cites it 11× “2018], 25-26, the averment of such a connection is sufficient to plead a basis for avoidance as an actually-fraudulent transfer under either Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (a)(1) or 11 U.S.C. § 548 (a)(1).”
Kelley v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (In re Petters Co.) (2016) mnb · cites it 13× “Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (a). Further, Stoebner has not sufficiently alleged his standing to pursue Count IV on behalf of the Polaroid estate.”
Show all 117 citing cases →
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(2) — 1 case
In re Petters Co. (2013) mnb “2018], 25-26, the averment of such a connection is sufficient to plead a basis for avoidance as an actually-fraudulent transfer under either Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (a)(1) or 11 U.S.C. § 548 (a)(1).”
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(A)(1) — 1 case
Hedback v. American Family Mutual Insurance (In Re Mathews) (1997) mnb
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(a) — 20 cases
Addison v. Seaver (2008) ca8 “” Minn.Stat. Ann. § 513.44; see also Sholdan II, 217 F.”
Finn v. Alliance Bank (2015) minn “” Rather, MUFTA addresses a “transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor,” Minn. Stat. §§ 513.44 (a), 513.45(a), which indicates that the focus of the statute is on individual transfers, rather than a pattern of transactions that are part of a greater “scheme.”
Klatte v. Buckman, Buckman & Reid, Inc. (2014) mnd
Kelley v. Associated Bank (In re Petters Co.) (2016) mnb
In re Petters Co. (2013) mnb
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(a)(1) — 37 cases
Finn v. Alliance Bank (2015) minn “” Rather, MUFTA addresses a “transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor,” Minn. Stat. §§ 513.44 (a), 513.45(a), which indicates that the focus of the statute is on individual transfers, rather than a pattern of transactions that are part of a greater “scheme.”
Stoebner v. Ritchie Capital Management, L.L.C. (In re Polaroid Corp.) (2012) mnb “Minn.Stat. § 513.44.(b)(8): Lack of Reasonably Equivalent Value for Transfer.”
Finn v. Alliance Bank (2013) minnctapp “The receiver’s complaint brought, relevant to this appeal, four claims against Alliance and respondent banks: (1) that the payments made by First United to Alliance and respondent banks were voidable as actually fraudulent transfers, under Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (a)(1); (2) that…”
Bartholomew v. Avalon Capital Group, Inc. (2009) mnd
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(a)(2) — 25 cases
Finn v. Alliance Bank (2015) minn “” Rather, MUFTA addresses a “transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor,” Minn. Stat. §§ 513.44 (a), 513.45(a), which indicates that the focus of the statute is on individual transfers, rather than a pattern of transactions that are part of a greater “scheme.”
Finn v. Alliance Bank (2013) minnctapp “The receiver’s complaint brought, relevant to this appeal, four claims against Alliance and respondent banks: (1) that the payments made by First United to Alliance and respondent banks were voidable as actually fraudulent transfers, under Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (a)(1); (2) that…”
In re Petters Co. (2013) mnb “2018], 25-26, the averment of such a connection is sufficient to plead a basis for avoidance as an actually-fraudulent transfer under either Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (a)(1) or 11 U.S.C. § 548 (a)(1).”
Leonard v. Norman Vinitsky Residuary Trust (In Re Jolly's, Inc.) (1995) mnb “In Counts I and II of his complaint, the Plaintiff seeks to have the transfer of this security interest avoided as a fraudulent transfer within the scope of Minn.Stat. §§ 513.44 and 513.45. *836 In Count VI of his complaint, the Plaintiff seeks judgment against SEI in collection…”
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(a)(2)(B) — 1 case
Stoebner v. Opportunity Finance, LLC (2016) mnd “Minn. Stat. § 513.44 . a. Debtor Entity Represented by the Trustee In the Order, the Bankruptcy Court found that both the Trustee and the alleged creditors lacked standing.”
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(a)(2)(b) — 1 case
Bartholomew v. Avalon Capital Group, Inc. (2009) mnd
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(a)(2)(h) — 2 cases
Citizens State Bank of Hayfield v. Leth (1990) minnctapp “On May 31, 1989, the trial court declared the transfer void as violative of Minn.Stat. § 513.44 and thus subject to all liens incurred prior to the May 1984 transfer.”
United States v. Bigalk (2009) mnd
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(a)(2)(i) — 5 cases
Leonard v. Norman Vinitsky Residuary Trust (In Re Jolly's, Inc.) (1995) mnb “In Counts I and II of his complaint, the Plaintiff seeks to have the transfer of this security interest avoided as a fraudulent transfer within the scope of Minn.Stat. §§ 513.44 and 513.45. *836 In Count VI of his complaint, the Plaintiff seeks judgment against SEI in collection…”
In re Petters Company, Inc. (2013) mnb “lack of reasonable equivalent value received by the Debtor-transferor for the property transferred, Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b)(8). 42 The plausibility of the Trustee’s badges-based pleading is not quite as powerful for employee-defendants as it is for creditor-defendants.”
Stoebner v. Ritchie Capital Management, L.L.C. (In re Polaroid Corp.) (2012) mnb “Minn.Stat. § 513.44.(b)(8): Lack of Reasonably Equivalent Value for Transfer.”
Citizens State Bank of Hayfield v. Leth (1990) minnctapp “On May 31, 1989, the trial court declared the transfer void as violative of Minn.Stat. § 513.44 and thus subject to all liens incurred prior to the May 1984 transfer.”
Running v. Dolan (In re Goodspeed) (2015) mnb
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(a)(2)(ii) — 5 cases
Afremov v. Sulloway & Hollis, P.L.L.C. (2013) mnd
Kelley v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (In re Petters Co.) (2016) mnb “Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (a). Further, Stoebner has not sufficiently alleged his standing to pursue Count IV on behalf of the Polaroid estate.”
United States v. Bigalk (2009) mnd
Running v. Dolan (In re Goodspeed) (2015) mnb
Rahn's Oil & Propane, Inc. v. Ettel Logistics, Inc., ELI Logistics, Inc. (2015) minnctapp
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(a)(l) — 1 case
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Brown (2009) mnd
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b) — 38 cases
Addison v. Seaver (2008) ca8 “” Minn.Stat. Ann. § 513.44; see also Sholdan II, 217 F.”
Finn v. Alliance Bank (2015) minn “” Rather, MUFTA addresses a “transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor,” Minn. Stat. §§ 513.44 (a), 513.45(a), which indicates that the focus of the statute is on individual transfers, rather than a pattern of transactions that are part of a greater “scheme.”
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
Ritchie Capital Management v. John Stoebner (2015) ca8 “§ 548 (a); Minn.Stat. § 513.44(a). In a case that involves numerous entities, it is important to identify precisely whose intent is relevant to the consideration of fraudulent intent.”
Finn v. Alliance Bank (2013) minnctapp “The receiver’s complaint brought, relevant to this appeal, four claims against Alliance and respondent banks: (1) that the payments made by First United to Alliance and respondent banks were voidable as actually fraudulent transfers, under Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (a)(1); (2) that…”
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(1) — 8 cases
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
Ritchie Capital Management v. John Stoebner (2015) ca8 “§ 548 (a); Minn.Stat. § 513.44(a). In a case that involves numerous entities, it is important to identify precisely whose intent is relevant to the consideration of fraudulent intent.”
In re Petters Company, Inc. (2013) mnb “lack of reasonable equivalent value received by the Debtor-transferor for the property transferred, Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b)(8). 42 The plausibility of the Trustee’s badges-based pleading is not quite as powerful for employee-defendants as it is for creditor-defendants.”
George Reilly, as trustee of the Nathan L. Bentson 1993 Irrevocable Trust v. Michael J. Antonello (2014) minnctapp
Citizens State Bank of Hayfield v. Leth (1990) minnctapp “On May 31, 1989, the trial court declared the transfer void as violative of Minn.Stat. § 513.44 and thus subject to all liens incurred prior to the May 1984 transfer.”
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(10) — 3 cases
In re Petters Company, Inc. (2013) mnb “lack of reasonable equivalent value received by the Debtor-transferor for the property transferred, Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b)(8). 42 The plausibility of the Trustee’s badges-based pleading is not quite as powerful for employee-defendants as it is for creditor-defendants.”
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
Afremov v. Sulloway & Hollis, P.L.L.C. (2013) mnd
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(11) — 1 case
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Brown (2013) minnctapp
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(2) — 3 cases
Citizens State Bank of Hayfield v. Leth (1990) minnctapp “On May 31, 1989, the trial court declared the transfer void as violative of Minn.Stat. § 513.44 and thus subject to all liens incurred prior to the May 1984 transfer.”
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
Afremov v. Sulloway & Hollis, P.L.L.C. (2013) mnd
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(3) — 3 cases
In Re Minnesota Breast Implant Litigation (1998) mnd
Hedback v. American Family Mutual Insurance (In Re Mathews) (1997) mnb
Felker v. McGhan Medical Corp. (1998) mnd
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(4) — 3 cases
Stoebner v. Ritchie Capital Management, L.L.C. (In re Polaroid Corp.) (2012) mnb “Minn.Stat. § 513.44.(b)(8): Lack of Reasonably Equivalent Value for Transfer.”
Citizens State Bank of Hayfield v. Leth (1990) minnctapp “On May 31, 1989, the trial court declared the transfer void as violative of Minn.Stat. § 513.44 and thus subject to all liens incurred prior to the May 1984 transfer.”
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(5) — 4 cases
Stoebner v. Ritchie Capital Management, L.L.C. (In re Polaroid Corp.) (2012) mnb “Minn.Stat. § 513.44.(b)(8): Lack of Reasonably Equivalent Value for Transfer.”
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
Citizens State Bank of Hayfield v. Leth (1990) minnctapp “On May 31, 1989, the trial court declared the transfer void as violative of Minn.Stat. § 513.44 and thus subject to all liens incurred prior to the May 1984 transfer.”
Ritchie Capital Management v. John Stoebner (2015) ca8 “§ 548 (a); Minn.Stat. § 513.44(a). In a case that involves numerous entities, it is important to identify precisely whose intent is relevant to the consideration of fraudulent intent.”
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(6) — 1 case
Ritchie Capital Management v. John Stoebner (2015) ca8 “§ 548 (a); Minn.Stat. § 513.44(a). In a case that involves numerous entities, it is important to identify precisely whose intent is relevant to the consideration of fraudulent intent.”
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(7) — 1 case
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Brown (2009) mnd
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(8) — 4 cases
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
Stoebner v. Ritchie Capital Management, L.L.C. (In re Polaroid Corp.) (2012) mnb “Minn.Stat. § 513.44.(b)(8): Lack of Reasonably Equivalent Value for Transfer.”
Citizens State Bank of Hayfield v. Leth (1990) minnctapp “On May 31, 1989, the trial court declared the transfer void as violative of Minn.Stat. § 513.44 and thus subject to all liens incurred prior to the May 1984 transfer.”
Ritchie Capital Management v. John Stoebner (2015) ca8 “§ 548 (a); Minn.Stat. § 513.44(a). In a case that involves numerous entities, it is important to identify precisely whose intent is relevant to the consideration of fraudulent intent.”
— Minn. Stat. § 513.44(b)(9) — 5 cases
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown (2014) minn “The Bank alleged that the transfers were made with the intent to defraud the Bank because the transfers exhibited six of the eleven factors enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b). The Browns responded separately, denying the allegations in the complaint.”
Ritchie Capital Management v. John Stoebner (2015) ca8 “§ 548 (a); Minn.Stat. § 513.44(a). In a case that involves numerous entities, it is important to identify precisely whose intent is relevant to the consideration of fraudulent intent.”
In re Petters Company, Inc. (2013) mnb “lack of reasonable equivalent value received by the Debtor-transferor for the property transferred, Minn. Stat. § 513.44 (b)(8). 42 The plausibility of the Trustee’s badges-based pleading is not quite as powerful for employee-defendants as it is for creditor-defendants.”
In Re Minnesota Breast Implant Litigation (1998) mnd
Felker v. McGhan Medical Corp. (1998) mnd
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.