Legal Opinion

Estate of Goldman v. Goldman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided September 19, 2002PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*542A fair interpretation of the evidence (see Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490, 495), including defendants’ admissions, supports the trial court’s findings that the challenged transfers from defendant Donald Goldman to his wife and co-defendant herein were both presumptively and actually fraudulent as to his creditors, including plaintiff, which had actions pending against him at the time of the transfers (see Wall St. Assoc. v Brodsky, 257 AD2d 526, 528-529). The trial court correctly ruled, citing the definition of “creditor” in Debtor and Creditor Law § 270, that a docketed judgment is…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Thoreson v. Penthouse International, Ltd.New York Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. Wall Street Associates v. BrodskyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re GoldmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API