N.C. Gen. Stat. » Chapter 39
NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.9 (2026)

Extinguishment of claim for relief

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 39 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A claim for relief with respect to a voidable transfer or obligation under this Article is extinguished unless action is brought:

(1) Under G.S. 39-23.4(a)(1), not later than four years after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred or, if later, not later than one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been discovered by the claimant;

(2) Under G.S. 39-23.4(a)(2) or G.S. 39-23.5(a), not later than four years after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred; or

(3) Under G.S. 39-23.5(b), not later than one year after the transfer was made. (1997-291, s. 2; 2015-23, s. 1.)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 2003–2023 · leading case: KB Aircraft Acquisition, LLC v. Berry, 790 S.E.2d 559 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
KB Aircraft Acquisition, LLC v. Berry, 790 S.E.2d 559 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 38× “We hold that the term "transfer" refers to the actual date on which an asset was transferred, rather than the date when its fraudulent nature became apparent to a creditor, and that the statute is one of repose.”
Hoch v. Hoch (In re Hoch), 577 B.R. 202 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2017). · cites it 11× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.9 (1) (hereinafter the “UVTA Statute of Repose”).”
Strawbridge v. Sugar Mountain Resort, Inc., 243 F. Supp. 2d 472 (W.D.N.C. 2003). · cites it 2× “N.C. Gen.Stat. § 39-23.9. The statutes of limitations range from one to four years.”
Ivey v. Swofford (In Re Whitley), 463 B.R. 775 (Bankr. M.D.N.C. 2012). · cites it 5× “Similarly, the North Carolina Fraudulent Transfer Act, together with section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, permits the trustee to avoid a transfer made “with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of the debtor” within the four-year period specified in N.C.…”
Richard Cook v. United States, 27 F.4th 960 (4th Cir. 2022). “§ 548 (a)(1) (two years), with N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.9 (2) (four years).”
Finn v. All. Bank, 838 N.W.2d 585 (Minn. Ct. App. 2013). “§ 56-10-23 (2012); N.C. Gen.Stat. § 39-23.9 (2011); N.D. Cent.”
Angell v. Montague Farms, Inc. (In re Tanglewood Farms, Inc.), 515 B.R. 218 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2014). · cites it 2× “N.C. Gen.Stat. § 39-23.9), Allman v. Wappler (In re Cansorb Indus.”
Window World of Baton Rouge, LLC v. Window World, Inc.; Window World of St. Louis, Inc. v. Window World, Inc., 2019 NCBC 10 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2019). · cites it 36× “See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.4 (a). Specifically, section 39-23.”
Bledsoe III, Tr. v. Flamingo Props., LLC (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2021). · cites it 5× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.9 . Instead, the trustee takes the position that he can step into the shoes of the IRS and use the longer 10-year lookback period contained in the IRC, in conjunction with the NC UVTA, to avoid the transfers.”
McFee v. Presley, 2022 NCBC 33 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2022). · cites it 4× “McFee filed this action in November 2021. She alleges that the sales of CPP’s assets to Pacon and Bay Sales first alerted her to Presley’s wrongdoing and that she discovered these sales only recently.”
Mascaro v. Mountaineer Land Grp., LLC, 2006 NCBC 18 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2006). · cites it 6× “{59} Under N.C.G.S. § 39-23.9, claims under N.C.G.S.”
Howard v. Iomaxis, LLC, 2021 NCBC 82 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2021). · cites it 3× “18); see N.C.G.S. § 39-23.9(1) (providing that a claim for relief under the UVTA must be brought within “four years after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred or, if later, not later than one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been…”
Show all 19 citing cases →
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.9(1): 5 cases
KB Aircraft Acquisition, LLC v. Berry, 790 S.E.2d 559 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016). “We hold that the term "transfer" refers to the actual date on which an asset was transferred, rather than the date when its fraudulent nature became apparent to a creditor, and that the statute is one of repose.”
Hoch v. Hoch (In re Hoch), 577 B.R. 202 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2017). “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.9 (1) (hereinafter the “UVTA Statute of Repose”).”
Window World of Baton Rouge, LLC v. Window World, Inc.; Window World of St. Louis, Inc. v. Window World, Inc., 2019 NCBC 10 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2019). “See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.4 (a). Specifically, section 39-23.”
Howard v. Iomaxis, LLC, 2021 NCBC 82 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2021). “18); see N.C.G.S. § 39-23.9(1) (providing that a claim for relief under the UVTA must be brought within “four years after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred or, if later, not later than one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been…”
McFee v. Presley, 2022 NCBC 33 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2022). “McFee filed this action in November 2021. She alleges that the sales of CPP’s assets to Pacon and Bay Sales first alerted her to Presley’s wrongdoing and that she discovered these sales only recently.”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.9(2): 1 case
Hoch v. Hoch (In re Hoch), 577 B.R. 202 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2017). “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.9 (1) (hereinafter the “UVTA Statute of Repose”).”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-23.9(3): 1 case
Mascaro v. Mountaineer Land Grp., LLC, 2006 NCBC 18 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2006). “{59} Under N.C.G.S. § 39-23.9, claims under N.C.G.S.”
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.