Although a New York trial court dismisses a nursing home’s case for fraudulent conveyance against a resident’s daughter who lives out of state because the resident transferred funds to the daughter years before the resident entered the nursing home, the court allows a case against the resident’s out-of-state son to proceed because those transfers occurred when the resident was in the nursing home. Amsterdam Nursing Home Corp. v. Walkin (N.Y. Sup. Ct., No. 654813/2018, Dec. 23, 2019).
Slavna Walkin transferred $60,000 to her daughter, Karolina Walkin, in 2012. She entered a nursing home in 2016 and around this time transferred $67,969.23 to her son, Slavko Chakovan. When Slavna Walkin died, she owed the nursing home $176,264.47.
The nursing home sued Karolina and Slavko for unjust enrichment, claiming the transfers made Slavna insolvent and ineligible for Medicaid. Karolina and Slavko filed motions to dismiss, arguing that the court did not have personal jurisdiction over them because they did not live in New York. The nursing home argued that Karolina and Slavko were subject to personal jurisdiction based on tortious conduct because the transfers were voidable fraudulent conveyances.
The New York Supreme Court, New York County, grants Karolina’s motion to dismiss, but denies Slavko’s motion. The court holds that the connection between the 2012 transfer to Karolina and the nursing home’s “claim that the transfers were made to prevent it from recovering a debt for services provided in 2016 and 2017 is too attenuated to warrant a finding of jurisdiction.” However, because the transfer to Slavko occurred near the time Slavna was in the nursing home, the court holds that the nursing home adequately states a case for fraudulent conveyance.
For the full text of this decision, click here.
Did you know that the ElderLawAnswers database now contains summaries of more than 2,000 fully searchable elder law decisions dating back to 1993? To search the database, click here.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
