United States National Bank Omaha v. Max

This is a creditor's action by the plaintiff bank to set aside an allegedly fraudulent conveyance made on May 21, 1976, by
the defendant Max E. Rupe to the defendant Shirley A. Rupe, his wife, of an undivided one-half interest in a parcel of real
estate, the Rupe residence. The bank, among other things, asked that a lien be impressed upon the interest which it claimed
had been fraudulently conveyed. Bob & Boots, Inc., another creditor of Max E. Rupe, was permitted to intervene and it
asked for similar relief. The bank and the intervenor each received the relief prayed for and the Rupes have appealed. While
this appeal was pending, Shirley A. Rupe paid the bank's claim and took an assignment of its lien. Upon motion, the bank was
dismissed as a party to the appeal. At this time, the remaining parties in interest are the intervenor and the defendants
Rupe. The Rupes make the following assignments of error: (1) The District Court erred in declaring the deed of conveyance a nullity
rather than merely voidable to the extent of the prejudice to the creditors; (2) The evidence is insufficient to support the
findings of the trial court; (3) The petition in intervention did not state a cause of action and the evidence did not support
the judgment because the intervenor was not a creditor at the time of the conveyance and it neither pleaded nor proved an
intent to defraud subsequent creditors; and (4) The trial court erred in determining that the Updike Oil Company, a corporation,
was the alter ego of the defendant Max E. Rupe and that Max was liable for the debts of the corporation to the intervenor.
We modify and affirm as modified.