Dunham v. Dunham

WALTERS, Chief Judge.

Carl Dunham appeals from a district court’s judgment which held that a fraudulent transfer of real property did not occur between spouses. I.C. §§ 55-913 and 55-914. The court held that on the date the real property was purchased and the quitclaim deed was executed, the spouse executing the quitclaim deed had no interest in the property. Consequently, no “transfer” under the Idaho Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act took place. For the reasons explained below, we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Carl Dunham (Carl), of Connecticut, and Roger Dunham (Roger), of Idaho,…