Legal Opinion

Sackin v. Kersting

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided May 4, 1970No. 9807-PRPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STRUCKMEYER, Vice Chief Justice.

Louis A. Sackin, appellant herein, moved for rehearing asserting that the executions deny due process of law contrary to the opinion, Sniadach v. Family Finance Corporation of Bayview, 395 U.S. 337, 89 S.Ct. 1820, 23 L.Ed.2d 349.

We pointed out in our decision, Sackin v. Kersting, 105 Ariz. 464, 466 P.2d 758, that by Arizona’s Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, A.R.S. § 44 — 1001, et seq., every conveyance made by a person who is thereby rendered insolvent is fraudulent, and that his creditors may execute on the property conveyed. By Paragraph 6 of Kersting’s…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. of Bay ViewSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Linder v. Lewis, Roca, Scoville & BeauchampArizona Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Sackin v. KerstingArizona Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Springfield Acceptance Co. v. LarounisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Jensen v. EamesUtah Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Realty Exchange Corp. v. Cadillac Land & Development Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1970
  3. Realty Exchange Corp. v. Phoenix Title & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1971
  4. Carey v. SoucyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2018
  5. Transamerica Occidental Life Insurance v. Daly (In re Daly)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Arizona · 1983

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API