lawyerliz_IHB
New member
<p>I'm now wondering about my previous analysis? Could this be what is known in Florida as a fraudulent transfer? The law's on the books, but very, very hard to prove.</p>
<p>Of course, if there wasn't any fraud, as there wasn't in my client's case, then there's no fraudulent transfer. Strangely enough, I have a feeling, just a feeling, mind you that putting the money in a relative's name, rather than one's own, might be regarded as mens rea (guilty mind), so if you can prove that's where the money came from, you might have a slightly greater ability to prove your case.</p>
<p>I'm sure there is an equivalent statute in every state. Before it was amended, Fla's was taken directly from a statute of Elizabeth the First. Not a new ploy!!</p>
<p>Of course, if there wasn't any fraud, as there wasn't in my client's case, then there's no fraudulent transfer. Strangely enough, I have a feeling, just a feeling, mind you that putting the money in a relative's name, rather than one's own, might be regarded as mens rea (guilty mind), so if you can prove that's where the money came from, you might have a slightly greater ability to prove your case.</p>
<p>I'm sure there is an equivalent statute in every state. Before it was amended, Fla's was taken directly from a statute of Elizabeth the First. Not a new ploy!!</p>