holding that where a purported asset has no monetary worth, a claimant has "failed to demonstrate a cause of action under the [UFTA] . . . because technically no asset of value was transferred"
Summary of this case from Amato v. Cortese2000
holding that where a purported asset has no monetary worth, a claimant has "failed to demonstrate a cause of action under the [UFTA] . . . because technically no asset of value was transferred"
Summary of this case from Amato v. CorteseFull title:PETITIONS FOR CERTIFICATION
Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey
Date published: Jan 1, 2000
The Authority appealed, and the Appellate Division reversed. That court, in a per curiam opinion, concluded…
Verni ex Rel. Burstein v. StevensSee OTR Assocs., supra, 353 N.J.Super. at 55, 801 A.2d 407 (finding veil piercing warranted where Blimpie…