This dispute grows out of the Stanford ponzi-scheme litigation in the Fifth Circuit. A central piece of those cases is how to give priority to different creditors under the Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act.

The Fifth Circuit issued an opinion in this case in March 2015, but then fairly quickly withdrew it and certified this question to the Texas Supreme Court:

Considering the definition of “value” in section 24.004(a) of the Texas Business and Commerce Code, the definition of “reasonably equivalent value” in section 24.004(d) of the Texas Business and Commerce Code, and the comment in the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act stating that “value” is measured “from a creditor’s viewpoint,” what showing of “value” under TUFTA is sufficient for a transferee to prove the elements of the affirmative defense under section 24.009(a) of the Texas Business and Commerce Code?

The Court has accepted the certified question and, after the case is briefed, will likely set the case for oral argument before issuing an opinion.