Ries v. Wintz Properties, Inc. (In Re Wintz Companies)

How courts have described this case

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

• construing similar provisions in Minnesota UFTA; only value of the property in excess of encumbrances and exemption is an “asset” under UFTA; if not an “asset,” UFTA does not apply
• “[I]n order to avail himself of the benefits conferred by § 544(b) ... the Trustee ‘must first show that there is an actual unsecured creditor holding an allowable unsecured claim ... who, under [state] law, could avoid the transfers in question.’ ”
• “[I]n order to avail himself of the benefits conferred by § 544(b) ... the Trustee ‘must first show that there is an actual unsecured creditor holding an allowable unsecured claim ... who, under [state] law, could avoid the transfers in question.’ ” (citation omitted)
• only the unencumbered, nonexempt portion of property is an “asset”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).