§3439

However, we need not decide this issue because either Cal.

3439 through 3439.12 (West 1997) (hereafter, the CUFTA and section 3439.xx, respectively). The CUFTA provides remedies to creditors with respect to fraudulent transfers made by debtors. Section 3439.04 defines a fraudulent transfer, and section 3439.07 provides remedies to creditors. Those remedies delimit both the right of the creditor to dem

hich was a liquidating distribution from Kern, Inc. and its subsidiaries through a conduit entity, KORC, to the sole shareholder petitioner Larry Delpit. II. Credits for Amounts Petitioners Transferred to KORC Petitioners cite California Civil Code sec. 3439.09(b) (West 1970); Aqqregates Associated, Inc. v. Packwood, 375 P.2d 425 (Cal. 1962); and Patterson v. Missler, 48 Cal. Rptr. 215 (Ct. App. 1965), for the proposition that under California law, it is clear that respondent's recovery is limit

3439.04(a)(2) (West 1997 & Supp. 2013), or (2) is either 6 We IOOk to state law to determine whether there was a fraudulent transfer. See Dalton v. Commissioner, 135 T.C. 393, 407, 411 (2010), rev'd on other arounds, 682 F.3d 149 (1st Cir. 2012); Hudgins v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2012-260, at *27-*28. Mr. Owyang did not specificallymention C

3439.04(a) (West Supp. 2011) provides: (a) A transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent 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 as follows: (1) With actual intent to hinder, delay, or

3439.12 (West 1997). In that the diversions of funds at issue all occurred after January 1, 1987, we conclude that California’s version of the UFTA applies. That version, which is codified at Cal. Civ. Code secs. 3439-3439.12, allows transfers to be set aside by present or future creditors for either actual fraud (sec. 3439.04(a)) or construct

After concessions, the issues remaining for decision are: (1) Whether assessment of transferee liability against petitioner is barred by the period of limitations set forth in section 3439.09 of the California Civil Code (West 1997); and, if not, (2) whether petitioner is liable as a transferee pursuant to section 6901 for the unpaid Federal income taxes and additions to tax of Mr.

3439.12 (West 1997). All the transfers that respondent alleges are fraudulent took place after 1987. Accordingly, the UFTA applies. California Civil Code section 3439.04 provides: A transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor's claim arose before or after the transfer was made or the ob

Code section 3439.04 (West 1997), which provides: A transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent 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 as follows: (a) With actual intent to hinder, delay, or de

3439.05 (West 1993 Supp.), which is identical to Fla. Stat. Ann. section 726.106(1) (West 1988)); Ginsberg v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1965-36. The liabilities of an estate include unpaid Federal taxes, penalties, and interest on the date of the transfer in computing whether an estate is solvent. Leach v. Commissioner, 21 T.C. 70, 75 (1953); L

Because the transfers were made in California, California Civil Code section 3439.05 applies.

§§ 3439.04 (West - 13 - 1970) which provides: Every conveyance made and every obligation incurred by a person who is or will be thereby rendered insolvent is fraudulent as to other creditors without regard to his actual intent if the conveyance is made or the obligation incurred without a fair consideration. Insolvency under California law is defin