Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 15-3-101 (2026)

Definitions

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The following words and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed herein, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:

Laws, 2006, ch. 371, § 1, eff. 7/1/2006.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2004–2023 · leading case: Stanley v. Pilots of Gulfport, Inc., 951 So. 2d 535 (Miss. 2006).
Stanley v. Pilots of Gulfport, Inc., 951 So. 2d 535 (Miss. 2006). “[2] This statute has been replaced, effective July 1, 2006, by the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, Miss.Code Ann. §§ 15-3-101 et seq. (Supp.”
In Re Gulfport Pilots Ass'n, Inc., 434 B.R. 380 (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 2010). “§ 15-3-3, repealed and replaced by Miss.Code Ann. §§ 15-3-101 et seq. (2006).”
Est. of Roby v. Roby, 84 So. 3d 786 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 15-3-101(b)(iii) (Supp.2010).”
Carroll v. Carroll, 78 So. 3d 332 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 15-3-101 to -121 (Rev.2003).”
Aldridge v. Cain (S.D. Miss. 2022). · cites it 6× “Additionally, Defendants say Aldridge does not have a cause of action under the Mississippi Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, Miss. Code Ann. §15-3-101 et. seq., since the definitions of the terms “creditor” and “claim” are identical under the federal and state statutes.”
Curtis Dean Lofton Sr. v. Sharon Renae Lofton & Pentagon Fed. Credit Union (Miss. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 3× “” Miss. Code Ann. § 15-3-101 (d). In this case, Renae filed a separate divorce complaint on April 23, 2018, requesting equitable distribution, alimony, attorney’s fees and other relief.”
BankUnited, N.A. v. D & D Env't, Inc. (S.D. Miss. 2022). “Miss. Code Ann. §§ 15-3-101 . Under UFTA, “[a] transfer.”
Henderson v. Howse (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 2021). “See Miss. Code Ann. § 15-3-107 (2)(a)-(n). But Trustee cannot recover under MUFTA, because the statute’s definition of “asset” as “property of a debtor” excludes “[p]roperty to the extent it is generally exempt under nonbankruptcy law.”
Benny R. Knight, Sr. (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 2023). “”); see also Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, Miss. Code Ann. § 15-3-101 (b)(ii) (defining “asset” to exclude “[p]roperty to the extent it is generally exempt under nonbankruptcy law”).”
H.S. Stanley, Jr. v. Mississippi State Pilots of Gulfport, Inc. (Miss. 2004). “Moreover, this fact was repeatedly admitted at trial by all of the individual 2 This statute has been replaced, effective July 1, 2006, by the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, Miss. Code Ann. §§ 15-3-101 et seq. (Supp.”
Miss. Code Ann. § 15-3-101(b)(iii): 1 case
Est. of Roby v. Roby, 84 So. 3d 786 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 15-3-101(b)(iii) (Supp.2010).”
Miss. Code Ann. § 15-3-101(c): 1 case
Aldridge v. Cain (S.D. Miss. 2022). “Additionally, Defendants say Aldridge does not have a cause of action under the Mississippi Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, Miss. Code Ann. §15-3-101 et. seq., since the definitions of the terms “creditor” and “claim” are identical under the federal and state statutes.”
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.