PJC Business

PJC 105.29

F RAUD AND N EGLIGENT M ISREPRESENTATION

PJC 105.29 Question and Instruction on Good Faith and Reasonably Equivalent Value—Affirmative Defense to Fraudulent Transfer Based on Actual Fraud (Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 24.009(a)) If you answered “Yes” to any part of Question ______ [ 105.25 ], then answer the corresponding part of the following question. Otherwise, do not answer the following question. QUESTION ______ Did Barry Buyer take any of the assets [ or incur any of the obligations ] listed below in good faith and for a reasonably equivalent value? A party takes an asset [ or incurs an obligation ] in good faith if the party (1) had no actual notice of the fraudulent intent of the debtor and (2) lacked knowl edge of such facts as would cause a person of ordinary prudence to question whether the debtor had fraudulent intent. Answer “Yes” or “No” for any of the following for which you answered “Yes” in Question ______ [ 105.25 ].

1. [ Asset or obligation 1. ] Answer: _______________ 2. [ Asset or obligation 2. ] Answer: _______________ 3. [ Asset or obligation 3. ] Answer: _______________

COMMENT When to use. PJC 105.29 submits a statutory defense available in two instances: (1) to the original transferee if the jury finds a debtor acted with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor, and (2) to a subsequent transferee against whom the credi tor seeks a money judgment. See Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 24.009(a), (b). Broad-form submission. PJC 105.29 is a broad-form question designed to be accompanied by one or more appropriate instructions. Tex. R. Civ. P. 277 requires that “the court shall, whenever feasible, submit the cause upon broad-form questions.” Tex. R. Civ. P. 277; see Thota v. Young , 366 S.W.3d 678, 689 (Tex. 2012) (rule 277’s use of

276