Nebraska Statutes
§ 36-802 — Definitions
Nebraska § 36-802
JurisdictionNebraska
Ch. 36Fraud and Voidable Transactions
This text of Nebraska § 36-802 (Definitions) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 36-802 (2026).
Text
As used in the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act:
(1)Affiliate means:
(i)a person that directly or indirectly owns, controls, or holds with power to vote, twenty percent or more of the outstanding voting securities of the debtor, other than a person that holds the securities:
(A)as a fiduciary or agent without sole discretionary power to vote the securities; or
(B)solely to secure a debt, if the person has not in fact exercised the power to vote;
(ii)a corporation twenty percent or more of whose outstanding voting securities are directly or indirectly owned, controlled, or held with power to vote, by the debtor or a person that directly or indirectly owns, controls, or holds, with power to vote, twenty percent or more of the outstanding voting securities of the debtor, other than a pe
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Legislative History
Source: Laws 2019, LB70, § 2.
Annotations: 1. Prior law (Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, sections 36-701 to 36-712) A blanket security agreement does not convey an asset under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act if everything subject to ownership that is described as collateral therein is fully encumbered by other creditors with superior claims at the time of the alleged transfer. Korth v. Luther, 304 Neb. 450, 935 N.W.2d 220 (2019). A security agreement by the debtor in favor of an alleged transferee is not the "asset" itself. Korth v. Luther, 304 Neb. 450, 935 N.W.2d 220 (2019). Creditors are not entitled to avoid as fraudulent a conveyance of property to which the debtor had no title at all or no such title as they could have subjected to payment of their claims. Korth v. Luther, 304 Neb. 450, 935 N.W.2d 220 (2019). Liens and encumbrances do not exist independently of the interests they attach to, and the reference in subsection (12) of this section to liens or other encumbrances does not modify the express requirement that there be an "asset" before there can be a "transfer." Korth v. Luther, 304 Neb. 450, 935 N.W.2d 220 (2019). Where the focus of a fraudulent transfer action is a security agreement by the debtor in favor of the alleged transferee, the question is what identifiable and legitimate claim of entitlement the debtor had, in which the debtor transferred an interest via the security agreement. Korth v. Luther, 304 Neb. 450, 935 N.W.2d 220 (2019). Whether there is a subject of ownership constituting property that can be an asset depends on a legitimate and identifiable claim of entitlement. Korth v. Luther, 304 Neb. 450, 935 N.W.2d 220 (2019). Pursuant to subsection (3) of section 36-702, a spouse's right to an equitable distribution of the marital estate is not a "right to payment" under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act. Reed v. Reed, 275 Neb. 418, 747 N.W.2d 18 (2008). Under subdivision (7)(i)(A) of section 36-702, an ex-wife does not count as an "insider." Parker v. Parker, 268 Neb. 187, 681 N.W.2d 735 (2004). When original conveyances of property held in joint tenancy take place long before plaintiff's claim arises, the operation of common-law joint tenancy does not qualify as a transfer as defined in subsection (12) of this section. Mahlin v. Goc, 249 Neb. 951, 547 N.W.2d 129 (1996).
Nearby Sections
15
§ 36-103
Interest in land; how createdCite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
Nebraska § 36-802, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ne/36-802.