N.J. Stat. » Title 25 — FRAUDS AND FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES
New Jersey Statutes

N.J. Stat. § 25:2-20 (2026)

Short title

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaN.J. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

25:2-20. Short title.

This article which was formerly known as the "Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act" shall be known and may be cited as the "Uniform Voidable Transactions Act," on or after the effective date of P.L.2021, c.92.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 82 cases (28 in the last 5 years), 1990–2026 · leading case: 2435 Plainfield Avenue, Inc. v. Twp. of Scotch Plains (In Re 2435 Plainfield Avenue, Inc.), 223 B.R. 440 (Bankr. D.N.J. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
2435 Plainfield Avenue, Inc. v. Twp. of Scotch Plains (In Re 2435 Plainfield Avenue, Inc.), 223 B.R. 440 (Bankr. D.N.J. 1998). · cites it 12× “65 prevents the avoidance of a tax sale foreclosure as a fraudulent transfer under N.J.Stat.Ann. § 25:2-20 et seq., and 2) the Township’s conduct of the tax foreclosure could not breach any duty of good faith and fair dealing since there was no privity of contract with the…”
Jurista v. Amerinox Processing, Inc., 492 B.R. 707 (D.N.J. 2013). · cites it 4× “§ 25:2-25(a), (b) and § 25:2-27(a), (b) In Counts 2, 4, 9, and 11 of his Complaint, Jurista seeks to avoid the alleged fraudulent transfers pursuant to two sections of New Jersey’s Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“the UFTA”), N.J.S.A. § 25:2-20, et seq. In Counts 4 20 and 11,…”
Irwin Halper v. Barry Halper, 164 F.3d 830 (3d Cir. 1999). · cites it 2× “1; (b) a fraudulent transfer under N.J.S.A. 25:2-20 et seq.; and (c) a fraudulent transfer under 11 U.”
Banco Popular North Am. v. Gandi, 876 A.2d 253 (N.J. 2005). “The second is whether the attorney violated any duty to the Bank, a non-client, in connection with the fraudulent transfer or a subsequent loan. We hold that there is no cause of action for creditor fraud in this jurisdiction.”
MSKP Oak Grove, LLC v. Venuto, 875 F. Supp. 2d 426 (D.N.J. 2012). · cites it 4× “INTRODUCTION This action, in which Plaintiff alleges various violations of the New Jersey Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, N.J. Stat. Ann. § 25:2-20 et seq., and other causes of action arising under New Jersey law, is before the Court on Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Amended…”
Wolf v. Tzanides (In re Tzanides), 574 B.R. 489 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2017). · cites it 3× “Second, Defendant argues that the Trustee’s Complaint is time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations set forth in the New Jersey Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, N.J.S.A. 25:2-20, et seq. (“NJ UFTA”) and N.”
Off. Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Fedders North Am., Inc. Ex Rel. Debtors' Estates v. Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P. (In Re Fedders North Am., Inc.), 405 B.R. 527 (Bankr. D. Del. 2009). “§§ 1301-1311; N.J.S.A. §§ 25:2-20 to 25:2-34. Because of this, it should come as no surprise that Plaintiffs success in pleading claims under Count V tracks its success under Count IV.”
Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Chiorazzo, 529 F. Supp. 2d 535 (D.N.J. 2008). · cites it 2× “*538 The 2007 action, alleging violations of New Jersey’s Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“NJFTA”), N.J. Stat. § 25:2-20 et seq., contains allegations that Rudolph and his two sons engaged in an intentionally fraudulent transfer (Count One) and a constructively fraudulent…”
Off. Comm. of Asbestos Pers. Injury v. Sealed Air Corp. (In Re W.R. Grace & Co.), 281 B.R. 852 (Bankr. D. Del. 2002). “ORDER For the reasons set forth in the Opinion of the Court filed herewith It is on this 29th day of July, 2002 ORDERED that the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act as enacted by the State of New Jersey, N.J.S.A. 25:2-20 et seq. shall govern this fraudulent conveyance proceeding,…”
McGrath v. Simon (In Re McGrath), 170 B.R. 78 (Bankr. D.N.J. 1994). · cites it 2× “§ 54:5-87 effective May 12, 1994 to clarify that a tax sale foreclosure is not a fraudulent transfer under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, N.J.S.A. §§ 25:2-20 to 34. N.J.S.A. § 54:5-87, which deals with foreclosure of tax sale certificates, now states in pertinent part: The…”
United States v. Patras, 909 F. Supp. 2d 400 (D.N.J. 2012). · cites it 4× “This is a civil federal tax liability suit brought by the United States against Defendant Ruth Patras pursuant to the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“UFTA”), N.J.S.A. §§ 25:2-20 to -34. The United States argues that Defendant Patras’s husband, Dr.”
G-I Holdings, Inc. v. Those Parties Listed on Exhibit a (In Re G-I Holdings, Inc.), 313 B.R. 612 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2004). “The 1994 Pushdown Transaction As previously noted, the Committee first seeks to avoid the 1994 Pushdown transaction as a fraudulent conveyance pursuant to § 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act *632 (“UFTA”), codified in the State of New Jersey…”
Show all 82 citing cases →
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.