669 B.R. 400
Bankr. D. Or.2025Background
- Keith Y. Boyd owned the Tamarack Property until April 11, 2022, when he conveyed it to the Grove Trust while creditor litigation was pending against him by the David W. Doner, Jr. Separate Property Trust (Doner Trust).
- The Doner Trust obtained a judgment against Boyd on April 29, 2022, after the property transfer, and then sought to set aside the transfer as fraudulent in state court.
- The Doner Trust also recorded a lis pendens on the property but had no deed, mortgage, or contract interest in the land.
- Boyd filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy on May 26, 2023, which triggered the automatic stay and halted the state court fraudulent transfer action.
- The bankruptcy trustee (Amborn) opposed the Doner Trust's motions to pursue the fraudulent transfer claims, asserting the trustee's exclusive right to such claims in bankruptcy.
- Current adversary proceeding sought determinations on fraudulent conveyance, declaratory relief, and interest in the property among Boyd, Grove, Amborn (trustee), and the Marasciullos (Doner Trust co-trustees).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who may pursue fraudulent transfer claims post-bankruptcy? | Doner Trust can continue its action despite bankruptcy filing | Only the bankruptcy trustee can assert these claims post-filing | Only trustee has exclusive right to pursue; creditor cannot |
| Did the Doner Trust have a secured or property interest in the Tamarack Property? | Judgment, lis pendens, or correction deed gave interest | Title had already passed to Grove Trust; no secured interest existed | Doner Trust's judgment lien never attached; lis pendens does not create an interest |
| Effect of filing a lis pendens in a fraudulent transfer case | Lis pendens provided lien or property interest | Lis pendens does not create an interest unless plaintiff prevails | Lis pendens gave no present property right or lien |
| Did Mr. Boyd retain an equitable interest in Tamarack Property after transfer? | Boyd's continued occupancy and correction deed show equitable interest | No evidence of court-recognized equitable interest prior to bankruptcy | No equitable interest established; judgment lien does not attach to mere occupancy |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. Ingles, 2 Or. 43 (1862) (judgment lien does not extend to property previously conveyed by the debtor)
- Holmes v. Wolfard, 47 Or. 93 (1905) (judgment creditor must first establish debtor's equitable interest before execution)
- Hoyt v. Am. Traders, Inc., 301 Or. 599 (1986) (lis pendens only gives priority if plaintiff prevails in the underlying case)
- Vukanovich v. Kine, 251 Or. App. 807 (2012) (lis pendens provides constructive notice only if claim succeeds)