Opinion
April 18, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Krausman, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The trial court properly determined that the plaintiff has established a triable issue of fact with respect to whether or not the real property in question was transferred with actual intent to defraud it (see, Debtor and Creditor Law § 276).
The appellant's assertion that the plaintiff's cause of action is time-barred is without merit. For a cause of action based upon a claim of actual intent to defraud pursuant to Debtor and Creditor Law § 276 Debt. Cred., the six-year limitations period of CPLR 213 (8), as read in light of the two-year discovery rule set forth in CPLR 203 (f [now g]), is controlling (see, McGuinness v Standard Drywall Corp., 193 A.D.2d 518; Piedra v Vanover, 174 A.D.2d 191, 194). Sullivan, J.P., Lawrence, Pizzuto, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.