N.C.P.I.—Civil 814.50

The (state number) issue reads:

“Was (name debtor's) [transfer of the (name asset) a fraudulent

transfer] [incurring of the (name obligation) a fraudulently incurred

obligation]?”

On this issue the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. This means the

plaintiff must prove, by the greater weight of the evidence, that (name

debtor2) [transferred3 the (name asset)4] [incurred the (name obligation)]

with intent5 to hinder, delay or defraud any6 of his creditors.7 [It is

immaterial whether the plaintiff’s claim arose before or after (name

debtor) [made the transfer] [incurred the obligation].8] In determining

whether (name debtor) had this intent, you may consider:9

[whether the [transfer] [obligation] was to an insider10]

[whether (name debtor) retained possession or control of the

property after its transfer]

[whether the [transfer] [obligation] was disclosed or concealed]

[whether (name debtor) had been sued or threatened with suit

before the [transfer was made] [obligation was incurred]]

[whether the transfer was of substantially all of (name debtor's)

assets]

[whether (name debtor) absconded]

[whether (name debtor) removed or concealed assets]

[whether the value of the consideration received by (name debtor)

was reasonably equivalent to the value of the [asset transferred]

[amount of the obligation incurred]]11

[whether (name debtor) was insolvent or became insolvent shortly

after the [transfer was made] [obligation was incurred]]. For purposes of

determining insolvency, [a debtor is insolvent if the sum of his debts is

greater than all of his assets at a fair valuation12].

[whether the transfer occurred shortly before or shortly after a

substantial debt was incurred]

[whether (name debtor) transferred the essential assets of the

business to a lien holder who transferred the assets to an insider13 of

(name debtor)]

[whether (name debtor) [made the transfer] [incurred the

obligation] without receiving reasonably equivalent value in exchange for

the [transfer] [obligation], and (name debtor) reasonably should have

believed that he would incur debts beyond his ability to pay them as they

would become due]

[whether (name debtor) transferred the assets in the course of

legitimate [estate] [tax] planning]

[(state such other factors as are relevant to the debtor's intent

based upon the evidence)].

Finally, as to this (state number) issue on which the plaintiff has

the burden of proof, if you find, by the greater weight of the evidence,

that (name debtor's) [transfer of the (name asset) was a fraudulent

transfer] [incurring of the (name obligation) was a fraudulently incurred

obligation], then it would be your duty to answer this issue “Yes” in favor

of the plaintiff.

If, on the other hand, you fail to so find, then it would be your duty

to answer this issue “No” in favor of the defendant.