Opinion ID: 2162259
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Fraudulent Transfer Damages

Text: [¶ 16] Finally, the parties agree that the court erred in using Handy Boat's contract damages as the basis for its award of fraudulent transfer damages pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A. § 3578(1)(C)(3). Section 3578(1)(C)(3) provides that a creditor in a fraudulent transfer action may obtain [d]amages in an amount not to exceed double the value of the property transferred or concealed.  (Emphasis added). The value of the property transferred was $60,000. Although Handy Boat asks this Court to conclude that an additional $2,790 was fraudulently transferred, it failed to reference this additional amount in its Rule 7(d)(1) statement. In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the court is to consider only the portions of the record referred to, and the material facts set forth, in the Rule 7(d) statements. Gerrity Co., Inc., v. Lake Arrowhead Corp., 609 A.2d 293, 295 (Me.1992) (emphasis added). On the record before us, therefore, the additional $2,790 must be disregarded in the computation of the damages on Count III. The entry is: Judgment on Counts I and II affirmed. Judgment on Count III vacated and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.