Janvey v. GMAG, LLC, a TUFTA case in which the creditor sought the “clawback” of a transfer from a third-party transferee, presented a frustrating pair of jury answers. On the one hand, the jury found a lack of good faith because the transferee had inquiry notice about the fraudulent nature of the transfer:

(The charge went on to define actual and inquiry notice.) On the other hand, the jury found that further investigation, based on the facts known to the transferee, would have been futile:

Answering a certified question from the Fifth Circuit about how to reconcile these findings, the Texas Supreme Court held: “A transferee on inquiry notice of fraud cannot shield itself from TUFTA’s clawback provision without diligently investigating its initial suspicions—irrespective of whether a hypothetical investigation would reveal fraudulent conduct. To hold otherwise rewards willful ignorance and undermines the purpose of TUFTA.” No. 19-0452 (Dec. 20, 2019).