- 58 -
Respondent contends that, because the transfer by MSSTA to
Mr. Scott of $104,580 of the amount that MSSTA realized from the
sale of its assets is a transfer subject to the Colorado fraudu-
lent conveyance statute, that amount of property was wrongfully
withheld within the meaning of the Colorado statutory interest
provision. Consequently, according to respondent, Mr. Scott is
liable for interest under that provision for the period March 15,
1990, to January 10, 1995.22 Petitioners counter that Mr. Scott
is not liable under the Colorado statutory interest provision for
interest during that period because no assets of MSSTA were
wrongfully withheld. On the instant record, we agree with
respondent.
Although the term "wrongfully withheld" is not defined by
the Colorado statutory interest provision, Colorado courts have
consistently held that that section is to be broadly construed.
See Mesa Sand & Gravel Co. v. Landfill, Inc., 776 P.2d 362, 364-
365 (Colo. 1989) (en banc); see also Isbill Associates, Inc. v.
City and County of Denver, 666 P.2d 1117, 1121 (Colo. App. 1983).
22 Par. 5 of the closing agreement stated:
Carter, Scott, AST, MSSTA and the Internal Revenue
Service agree that in the event one or more of these
parties (Carter, Scott, and/or AST) is found to be
personally liable as a transferee, the liability is
$164,981 plus interest from March 15, 1990.
Respondent stipulated that the foregoing does not estop peti-
tioners from arguing that they are not liable for interest from
Mar. 15, 1990, to Jan. 10, 1995.
Page: Previous 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011