Rochelle's Daily Wire

Circuit courts differ on their understanding of Supreme Court precedent and are now split 3/3 on whether a real estate tax foreclosure can be set aside as a constructive fraudulent transfer.

The transfer of title in a real estate foreclosure is not a transfer on account of an antecedent debt and therefore can’t be a preference, at least in Florida.

The circuits are split on whether the Supreme Court’s BFP opinion can be extended to bar fraudulent transfer attacks on in rem real estate tax foreclosures.

Critical vendor status is a defense to a preference claim only when the defendant was specifically named in an order, stipulation or agreement requiring full payment of the creditor’s prepetition claim, Judge Dorsey says.

Congress may have made a mistake in drafting, but the plain language of 28 U.S.C. § 1409(b) must control, Judge Grossman says.

The appeals court sticks to basics and rejects several clever arguments to beat a preference.

Tenth Circuit and its BAP follow the same controlling authority but reach opposite results.

Does Rule 9006(a) expand the 30-day window for perfection, and can perfection be “substantially contemporaneous” even if perfection occurs after 30 days?

New York district judge agrees with the ABI Journal: Congress did not succeed in requiring trustees to file small-dollar avoidance actions in the defendant’s district.

Circuits are split on the date of transfer resulting from a garnishment.