1 In the 2 United States Court of Appeals 3 For the Second Circuit 4 5 6 August Term, 2021 7 8 (Argued December 16, 2021; Decided June 27, 2022) 9 10 11 No. 20-3865-bk 12 13 BRIAN L. GUNSALUS, GLIEE V. GUNSALUS, 14 15 Plaintiffs-Appellees, 16 17 v. 18 19 COUNTY OF ONTARIO, NEW YORK 20 21 Defendant-Appellant. * 22 23 24 25 Appeal from the United States District Court 26 for the Western District of New York 27 No. 20-cv-6134 28 Frank P. Geraci, Jr., Chief Judge, Presiding. 29 30 Before: CABRANES, PARKER, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

* The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to amend the official caption as set forth above. 1 1 2 3 Defendant-Appellant, County of Ontario, appeals from a judgment of the 4 United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Geraci, J.). 5 Plaintiffs-Appellees sought to set aside the loss of their home to the County as a 6 result of a tax lien foreclosure. The Bankruptcy Court set aside the transfer as a 7 fraudulent conveyance on the grounds that it was not for “reasonably equivalent 8 value.” We AFFIRM.

9 10 11 KARI A. TALBOTT (Mark Wattenberg, 12 on the brief), Legal Assistance of 13 Western New York, Inc., for Plaintiffs- 14 Appellees. 15 16 JASON S. DIPONZIO, Jason S. 17 DiPonzio, P.C., for Defendant- 18 Appellant. 19 20 21 BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Circuit Judge: 22 BACKGROUND 23 This case arises from the foreclosure of a tax lien on a home in Ontario 24 County, New York, owned by a married couple, Brian and Gliee Gunsalus, which 25 resulted in the loss of title to their home. Following the foreclosure, the couple filed 26 for protection under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code and filed a complaint 27 seeking to avoid the loss of their home on the grounds that it was a fraudulent

2 1 conveyance. The Bankruptcy Court set aside the transfer, and the County appeals,

2 raising two questions. The first is whether the Gunsaluses had standing to bring

3 the avoidance proceeding. The second is whether the transfer effected by Ontario

4 County in foreclosing on the lien was entitled to the presumption of having

5 yielded “reasonably equivalent value” under Section 548 of the Bankruptcy Code.

6 We answer yes and no, respectively.

7 The property in question is a modest family home. Mrs. Gunsalus has lived

8 there her entire life and for the past fifteen years she and Mr. Gunsalus have lived

9 there with their disabled adult son. They owned the home free and clear of 10 mortgages. Due to a temporary reduction in Mr. Gunsalus’ wages, the couple was 11 unable to pay their real estate taxes, and the property became subject to a tax lien 12 in the amount of unpaid taxes, $1,290. 13 After the lien remained unpaid for a number of mont