Laserfiche WebLink
addition, HRS § 651C-6(5) states that an obligation is incurred when the writing is delivered. <br /> Therefore, the earliest Defendants' claim could have become"due" would have been April 30, <br /> 2009, eight days after the transfer. <br /> It is also important to note that Defendants were well aware before it submitted the <br /> invoices,that the property would be transferred back to the County. See Exhibit "H"at p. 2 <br /> (noting that on March 16, 2009, HINT and WWH were notified that property would have to be <br /> conveyed to the County). Therefore, not only was the property transferred prior to Defendants' <br /> demand for$3.2 million, the County, WWH and HIHT fully disclosed that the transfer would be <br /> made.10 Interestingly,Defendants did not raise any concerns or accuse the County, WWH or <br /> HIHT of a fraudulent transfer at that time. See Exhibit "H". <br /> 2. The Property was Owned by HIHT Who Is Not The Debtor <br /> Defendants allege that in April 2009, WWH became indebted to UniDev for$3.2 million <br /> dollars. See 139 of counterclaim,Exhibit`B". Defendants note that WWH had a leasehold <br /> interest in the land and this interest was transferred to HIHT. Defendants allege that HIHT <br /> transferred all of its interest in the land to the County. See 140 of counterclaim, Exhibit`B". <br /> Defendants assert the transfers by WWH and HIHT constitute fraudulent transfers pursuant to <br /> Chapter 651 C of the HRS. See 145 of counterclaim,Exhibit `B". Defendants' fraudulent <br /> conveyance theory fails for several reasons. <br /> First, as Defendants admit, only WWH was indebted to UniDev. Therefore, any transfer <br /> by HIHT can not constitute a fraudulent transfer under Chapter 651 C because HIHT was never <br /> the"debtor". HRS § 651 C-1 defines "debtor"as "a person against whom a creditor has a claim." <br /> Defendants do not allege, nor can they, that HIHT is the debtor. Therefore, it is clear that any <br /> property transferred by HIHT does not satisfy the requirements of Chapter 651 C. At best, <br /> 10 Whether the transfer was disclosed or concealed is a factor in determining whether a transfer is fraudulent. <br /> HRS§651 C-4(b)(3). Obviously,if one transfers property to avoid a debt,they would not notify the others of the transfer. <br /> 8 <br />