Nevertheless, it should be noted that this court has recently found an interest of a debtor general contractor in funds paid by joint checks where, as here, the debtor had a sufficient interest in the amounts paid by the joint checks and the property owner was not under any obligation to make direct payments to subcontractors. See Code Electric, Inc. v. Crampton, 197 B.R. 807, 808-09 (E.D.N.C. 1996) (Howard, J.). After trial the Bankruptcy Court held that "[appellant] contends that these checks were transferred in exchange for new value in that [appellant] gave up its lien rights.

Id. at 624.Code Electric, Inc. v. Crampton , 197 B.R. 807 (E.D.N.C. 1996).Rexwoods was never under any type of contractual obligation to pay Code directly, and Rexwoods never agreed to do so.

8. Generally, in a bankruptcy case filed by a subcontractor, a joint check issued by a general contractor to both the subcontractor and its sub-subcontractor constitutes "an interest of the debtor in property" to which Sections 541 and 547(b) apply. See, e.g., Code Elec, Inc. v. Crampton, 197 B.R. 807, 809 (E.D.N.C. 1996) (finding that when an owner had no contractual duty to pay a subcontractor directly, a joint check payable to the general contractor and the subcontractor became part of the debtor general contractor's estate); see also Georgia Pacific Corp. v. Sigma Serv. Corp., 712 F.2d 962, 967 (5th Cir.1983). It is to be remembered that Powell was the general contractor, Comstack (the debtor) was the subcontractor and IMPulse was the sub-subcontractor on the project.