Case Brief Example Response "Case Brief: Quality Car & Truck Leasing, Inc. v. Sark Quality Car & Truck Leasing, Inc. v. Sark, 2013 Ohio 44 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013) Facts: Plaintiff Quality Car & Truck Leasing, Inc. filed a complaint against the defendants, Michael Sark Sr., and his wife Paula, on the grounds that there was a fraudulent conveyance of property from the couple to their son Michael Sark Jr. The Sarks filed for bankruptcy in 2008 and owed money to one of their creditors, Quality Car & Truck Leasing, Inc. for the leasing of equipment. In the court documents filed in the bankruptcy case of the Sarks in 2008, they stated that the value of their residence was $203,500. The Sarks could not make their payments under the Chapter 12 bankruptcy plan and dismissed their bankruptcy claim. Quality Car & Truck Leasing then filed a claim against the Sarks for repayment of their debt and was awarded a judgment of $150,481.88. Before Quality filed its claim, the Sarks sold their residence to their son for a total of $1. After being awarded its judgment Quality Car & Truck Leasing, Inc. filed a claim against the Sarks stating that the conveyance of the residence to their son was a fraudulent conveyance under Ohio statute R.C. 13364.04(A)(2)(a). The plaintiff moved for summary judgment in the fraudulent conveyance case, which was granted by the trial court judge on the basis that there was no genuine issue of material fact and that the Sarks made a fraudulent conveyance under the aforementioned Ohio statute. Issue: Whether the trial court properly granted the motion for summary judgment finding that the transfer of the Sark residence to their son was a fraudulent conveyance. Ruling: Yes. The decision of the trial court was upheld. The granted motion for summary judgment by the trial court was not made in error. Reasoning: (Roger L. Kline, Judge)In the appeal filed by the Sarks, they contend that there were two genuine issues of material fact so that summary judgment should not be granted. First, they argue that there was no intent to defraud Quality Car & Truck Leasing, Inc. with respect to the transfer of their residence. Second, they claim that they were no longer debtors to Quality because they returned the equipment they had leased. The court found that under the Ohio fraudulent conveyance statute, R.C. 13364.04(A)(2)(a) intent to defraud is irrelevant when considering if a fraudulent conveyance has occurred and that there was no genuine issue of material fact that a fraudulent conveyance did occur under the statute. In response to the Sark's second contention, the court found that the Sarks were debtors to Quality by virtue of the judgment issued in favor of Quality against the Sarks in the Scioto Court of Common Pleas. Therefore the court ruled that summary judgment was properly granted