[PUBLISH]

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 21-11736 ____________________

SE PROPERTY HOLDINGS, LLC, As successor by merger with Vision Bank, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RUSTON C. WELCH, et al.,

Defendants,

NEVERVE LLC,

Defendant-Appellee. USCA11 Case: 21-11736 Document: 40-1 Date Filed: 04/11/2023 Page: 2 of 30

2 Opinion of the Court 21-11736

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 5:18-cv-00252-TKW-MJF ____________________

Before LAGOA and BRASHER, Circuit Judges, and BOULEE, 1 District Judge. LAGOA, Circuit Judge: This case presents issues of first impression to this Court re- garding the application of the Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“FUFTA”), Fla. Stat. § 726.101 et seq. In 2015, SE Property Holdings, LLC (“SEPH”), obtained a deficiency judgment against Neverve LLC (“Neverve”) after Neverve defaulted on loans se- cured by a mortgage on its property. Following this judgment, Neverve received the proceeds from an unrelated settlement. But Neverve transferred those proceeds to attorneys representing Neverve’s principal, David Stewart, in payment of attorney’s fees relating to Stewart’s personal bankruptcy proceedings. SEPH then sued Neverve based on Neverve’s allegedly fraudulent transfer of those settlement proceeds, asserting claims under FUFTA that sought compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees, as well as asserting a claim for an equitable lien. The district

1 Honorable J. P. Boulee, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Georgia, sitting by designation. USCA11 Case: 21-11736 Document: 40-1 Date Filed: 04/11/2023 Page: 3 of 30

21-11736 Opinion of the Court 3

court granted summary judgment in favor of Neverve, finding that FUFTA’s “catch-all” provision, see Fla. Stat. § 726.108(1)(c)3., did not allow for (1) an award of money damages against the trans- feror, (2) punitive damages, or (3) attorney’s fees. The court also granted summary judgment in favor of Neverve on SEPH’s equi- table lien claim, as Neverve no longer possessed the settlement pro- ceeds at issue. Neither Florida state courts nor this Court have squarely ad- dressed the FUFTA issues presented by this appeal. Based on the narrow interpretation of FUFTA in Freeman v. First Union Na- tional Bank, 865 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 2004), however, we believe the Florida Supreme Court would determine that FUFTA’s catch-all provision does not allow for an award of money damages against the transferor, an award of punitive damages, or an award of attor- ney’s fees. Thus, the district court was correct in granting sum- mary judgment in favor of Neverve on SEPH’s FUFTA claims. And we conclude that the district court did not err in granting sum- mary judgment in favor of Neverve on SEPH’s equitable lien claim. Accordingly, for the reasons discussed below, and with the benefit of o