New Jersey Statutes
N.J. Stat. § 25:2-29 (2026)
Remedies of creditor
✓ current as of May 2026
25:2-29. Remedies of creditor.
a. In an action for relief against a transfer or obligation under this article, a creditor, subject to the limitations in R.S.25:2-30, may obtain:
(1) Avoidance of the transfer or obligation to the extent necessary to satisfy the creditor's claim;
(2) An attachment or other provisional remedy against the asset transferred or other property of the transferee if available under applicable law; and
(3) Subject to applicable principles of equity and in accordance with applicable rules of civil procedure:
(a) An injunction against further disposition by the debtor or transferee, or both, of the asset transferred or of other property;
(b) Appointment of a receiver to take charge of the asset transferred or of other property of the transferee; or
(c) Any other relief the circumstances may require.
b. If a creditor has obtained a judgment on a claim against the debtor, the creditor, if the court so orders, may levy execution on the asset transferred or its proceeds.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1990–2026 · leading case: Jurista v. Amerinox Processing, Inc., 492 B.R. 707 (D.N.J. 2013).
Jurista v. Amerinox Processing, Inc., 492 B.R. 707 (D.N.J. 2013). “As pointed out by Defendants, that statute requires compliance with Rule 4:60 of the Rules Governing the Courts of the State of New Jersey. See N.J.S.A. § 25:2-29(a)(2) ("In an action for relief against a transfer or obligation under this article, a creditor .”
Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Antar, 120 F. Supp. 2d 431 (D.N.J. 2000). “See N.J.S.A. § 25:2-29. Among other remedies, a creditor may obtain “(1) Avoidance of the transfer or obligation to the extent necessary to satisfy the creditor’s claim .”
Forman v. Jeffrey Matthews Fin. Grp., LLC (In Re Halpert & Co.), 254 B.R. 104 (Bankr. D.N.J. 1999). “25:2-27, and N.J.S.A. 25:2-29). Count Three alleges that defendants Alan Halpert, Jeffrey Halpert, Matthew Cohen, and JMFG willfully converted the business and assets of Halpert & Co.”
United States v. Patras, 909 F. Supp. 2d 400 (D.N.J. 2012). “” N.J.S.A. § 25:2-29(a)(1). As such, the Court will set aside the transfer from Gallo to Ruth Patras.”
Wolf v. Tzanides (In re Tzanides), 574 B.R. 489 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2017). “Plaintiffs then filed a second complaint asking the court to void the transfer under N.J.S.A. 25:2-29 to the extent necessary to satisfy plaintiffs’ judgment against the defendant.”
Morganroth & Morganroth v. Norris, McLaughlin & Marcus, P.C., 331 F.3d 406 (3d Cir. 2003). “Without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer or obligation, and the debtor: (1) 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…”
United States v. Ruth Patras, 544 F. App'x 137 (3d Cir. 2013). “” N.J.S.A. § 25:2-29(a)(1). Dr. Patras owed the United States taxes.”
Fleet v. Rhode (In Re Fleet), 122 B.R. 910 (E.D. Pa. 1990). “661 (1985). Therefore, even if we would be inclined to apply the UFTA to determine the appropriate means for the Plaintiffs to remedy the fraudulent transfers in issue, we would be disinclined to find that the appointment of a receiver was in any sense indicative of or…”
Polina Roitburg, Etc. v. Leonid Roitburg (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2026). “Nor did the judge discern any basis for an award of attorney's fees under N.J.S.A. 25:2-29(a)(3)(c), which allows a court to award "any other relief the circumstances may require" for UFTA violations.”
Polina Roitburg, Etc. Vs. Leonoid Roitburg (l-1478-16, Morris Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2020). “N.J.S.A. 25:2-29(a)(1). Other remedies include attachment against the asset transferred or other property of the transferee, N.”
Balanced Bridge Funding LLC v. Mitnick Law Off., LLC (D.N.J. 2022). “N.J. Stat. Ann. § 25:2-29 (1989). The New Jersey Supreme Court has recognized that “[tJhe remedies available to a successful claimant under the [UVTA] are broad.”
Gmo Trust v. Bausch Health Companies Inc. (D.N.J. 2022). “N.J.S.A. § 25:2-29. Thus, the NJVTA primarily contemplates equitable, not monetary, relief.”
N.J. Stat. § 25:2-29(3)(c): 1 case
Forman v. Jeffrey Matthews Fin. Grp., LLC (In Re Halpert & Co.), 254 B.R. 104 (Bankr. D.N.J. 1999). “25:2-27, and N.J.S.A. 25:2-29). Count Three alleges that defendants Alan Halpert, Jeffrey Halpert, Matthew Cohen, and JMFG willfully converted the business and assets of Halpert & Co.”
N.J. Stat. § 25:2-29(a): 2 cases
Jurista v. Amerinox Processing, Inc., 492 B.R. 707 (D.N.J. 2013). “As pointed out by Defendants, that statute requires compliance with Rule 4:60 of the Rules Governing the Courts of the State of New Jersey. See N.J.S.A. § 25:2-29(a)(2) ("In an action for relief against a transfer or obligation under this article, a creditor .”
Tanya Kacan Vs. Claudio Belusic (fm-02-2237-11 & C-000303-17, Bergen Cnty. & Statewide) (Consol.) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019).
N.J. Stat. § 25:2-29(a)(1): 6 cases
United States v. Patras, 909 F. Supp. 2d 400 (D.N.J. 2012). “” N.J.S.A. § 25:2-29(a)(1). As such, the Court will set aside the transfer from Gallo to Ruth Patras.”
United States v. Ruth Patras, 544 F. App'x 137 (3d Cir. 2013). “” N.J.S.A. § 25:2-29(a)(1). Dr. Patras owed the United States taxes.”
Motorworld, Inc. v. William Benkendorf077009) (N.J. 2017).
Main Land Sussex Co., LLC Vs. Priti Shetty (l-0480-14, Morris Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019).
Polina Roitburg, Etc. Vs. Leonoid Roitburg (l-1478-16, Morris Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2020). “N.J.S.A. 25:2-29(a)(1). Other remedies include attachment against the asset transferred or other property of the transferee, N.”
N.J. Stat. § 25:2-29(a)(2): 1 case
Jurista v. Amerinox Processing, Inc., 492 B.R. 707 (D.N.J. 2013). “As pointed out by Defendants, that statute requires compliance with Rule 4:60 of the Rules Governing the Courts of the State of New Jersey. See N.J.S.A. § 25:2-29(a)(2) ("In an action for relief against a transfer or obligation under this article, a creditor .”
N.J. Stat. § 25:2-29(a)(3)(c): 2 cases
Polina Roitburg, Etc. v. Leonid Roitburg (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2026). “Nor did the judge discern any basis for an award of attorney's fees under N.J.S.A. 25:2-29(a)(3)(c), which allows a court to award "any other relief the circumstances may require" for UFTA violations.”
Polina Roitburg, Etc. Vs. Leonoid Roitburg (l-1478-16, Morris Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2020). “N.J.S.A. 25:2-29(a)(1). Other remedies include attachment against the asset transferred or other property of the transferee, N.”
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.