Hinsley v. Boudloche (In Re Hinsley)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that under Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act intangible, non-economic benefits, such as preservation of marriage, did not constitute reasonably equivalent value
• explaining that under Texas Uni‐ form Fraudulent Transfer Act intangible, non‐economic ben‐ efits, such as preservation of marriage, did not constitute rea‐ sonably equivalent value
• affirming summary judgment where no issue of genuine issue of material fact existed as to badges of fraud
• applying TUFTA and looking to cases under 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(2)
• Under Texas law, “[a] party asserting limitations must establish the applicability of the limitations statute, but must, as well, prove when the opponent’s cause of action aecrued[.]”
• ‘A party's self-serving and unsupported statement that she lacked the requisite intent is not sufficient to defeat summary judgment where the evidence otherwise supports a finding of fraud.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).