the requisite actual intent demanded by § 548(a)(1). Mayo v. Pioneer Bank & Trust Co., 270 F.2d 823 (5th Cir. 1959), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 962, 80 5.Ct. 878, 4 L.Ed.2d 877 (1960); Cf. In re White, 221 F.Supp. 64 (N.D.Cal.1963). With respect to the alternate basis for claiming a fraudulent transfer, when Amelia transferred her one-half interest in the property to William on April 18, 1979, she received no consideration. Amelia had a claim upon William at any time to require him to transfer title back to her without payment to him. Thus, it cannot be said that when William transferred a one-half interest in the property to Amelia on July 3, 1980, he received less than a reasonable equivalent value for the interest transferred. Luper v. Ruhl, 148 F.Supp. 888, 890 (S.D.Ohio 1956) (<HOLDING>); Mayo v. Pioneer Bank & Trust Co., supra. The
holding that because no real property interest was transferred to the agent by virtue of her redeeming the property the statute of frauds was inapplicable holding that property transferred by a spouse to avoid support obligation may be considered on the issue of property distribution as well as alimony holding a wife liable for necessary medical expenses incurred by her husband under the doctrine even though the wife did not sign as a guarantor and did not request that her husband be admitted nor anticipate that her husband would be admitted holding that a reservation clause gave a life estate to a spouse pursuant to a deed reserving use of the property to both husband and wife for life even though the husband had no interest in the property holding that where a bankrupt wife transferred a certain lot to her husband the husband being already the equitable owner of the transferred property it cannot be said that the lot was transferred to him without consideration