Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Gordon Brown
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WRIGHT, Justice.
Respondent Citizens State Bank Nor-wood Young America (Bank) seeks to set aside, under Minnesota’s Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (MUFTA), certain transfers made between appellants Gordon1 *58and Judy Brown pursuant to their uncontested marital dissolution judgment and decree. The district court granted summary judgment to the Bank, and the court of appeals affirmed. We granted the Browns’ petition for further review to address whether MUFTA applies to fraudulent transfers made pursuant to an uneon-tested marital dissolution decree. We now conclude that MUFTA applies to…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- BFP v. Resolution Trust CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Patterson v. ShumateSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Estes v. TitusMichigan Supreme Court · 2008
- Mejia v. ReedCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- State of Minnesota v. Brandon Wayne RiggsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- Finn v. Alliance BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- Ritchie Capital Management v. John StoebnerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2015
- John Stoebner v. Opportunity Finance, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2018
- Husky International Electronics, Inc. v. Ritz (In re Ritz)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · 2017
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.