A Chapter 7 trustee moved for summary judgment on three claims seeking to avoid a debtor's transfer of real property: (1) under 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(A) as well as § 544(b) and state law, as a transfer made with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor holding a non-dischargeable claim; (2) under 11 U.S.C. § 549(a), as an unauthorized post-petition transfer of estate property; and (3) under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b), as a preference. The Court denied the motion as to all three claims.

The debtor came into ownership of the real property at issue by virtue of a family member's death in May 2012. In November 2018, the debtor executed a deed to this property in favor of the defendant, the debtor's uncle. The debtor filed a Chapter 7 petition with his spouse on February 24, 2020, and did not disclose the transfer or any interest in the property. The deed to the debtor's uncle was recorded post-petition, in August 2020.

As to the claim asserting actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud, the debtor and defendant submitted affidavits disputing fraudulent intent and offering an innocent explanation for the transfer. As asserted in these affidavits, in June 2012 the debtor orally agreed to sell the property to the defendant in exchange for monthly payments until an existing mortgage was paid off, which occurred in fall 2018. The Court concluded these affidavits presented a genuine issue of material fact over the debtor's intent, precluding summary judgment.

As to the claim asserting an unauthorized post-petition transfer of estate property, the Court concluded a genuine issue of material fact existed over whether and to what extent the debtor owned the property at issue as of the petition date, and thus over whether the transferred property constituted property of the estate. The sale transaction described by the defendant, if true, amounted to an installment land sale contract under which the defendant obtained legal and equitable title in fall 2018.

As to the claim asserting a preferential transfer, the trustee contended summary judgment was appropriate under the facts as asserted by the defendant. The trustee, however, did "not accept the truthfulness of" the facts as asserted by the defendant. The trustee, therefore, failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that undisputed facts show entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.