State Ex Rel. Industrial Commission v. Wright
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WEISBERG, Judge.
¶ 1 Kevin Wright (“Mr.Wright”) and Annette Wright (“Mrs.Wright”) (together, “appellants”) appeal the trial court’s ruling that a modification of a premarital agreement, which would have had the effect of protecting Mr. Wright’s future earnings from garnishment, was a fraudulent conveyance under Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 44-1004 (1994). For the following reasons, we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
V 2 The parties do not dispute the facts of the case. Appellants were married on June 4, 1997. Prior to the marriage, they executed a premarital agreement…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Airflow Houston, Inc. v. Theriot, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1993
- Brink Electric Construction Co. v. Arizona Department of RevenueCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1995
- Bender v. BenderCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1979
- State Farm Mutual Insurance v. St. Joseph's HospitalArizona Supreme Court · 1971
- Heinig v. HudmanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Jones v. Tauber & Balser, P.C.United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · 2013
- Kaufmann v. M & S Unlimited, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
- Korth v. LutherNebraska Supreme Court · 2019
- Bonnie Creech v. John Claude HegglinDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2026
- Kaufmann v. M & S Unlimited, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.