With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". aff'd, 912 F.2d 464 (4th Cir. 1990). Rather, " 'actual intent’ to defraud must be shown.” Id. See also In re Cushman Bakery, 526 F.2d 23, 32 (1st Cir. 1975) (noting that "[although every preferential payment to a creditor has the effect of hindering or delaying other creditors from collecting their judgments, ... granting a security interest to secure funds with which the debtor intends to pay a preexisting debt does not necessarily imply an intent to 'hinder, delay or defraud creditors’[.]”); Mayo v. Pioneer Bank & Trust Co., 270 F.2d 823, 831 (1959) ("Although a transfer may have the effect of hindering or delaying or defrauding creditors, incidental effect is not enough to satisfy the requirements of actual intent to defraud.”); In re Decker, 295 F.Supp. 501, 515 (W.D.Va.1969) (<HOLDING>), aff’d, 420 F.2d 378 (4th Cir. 1980). 10 .

A: holding that effect of bankruptcy discharge under arizona law is not an extinguishment of the debt but only a bar to enforcement of the debt as a personal obligation of the debtor
B: holding that the repayment of an antecedent debt constitutes fair consideration
C: holding that a preexisting or antecedent debt may constitute sufficient consideration to support a mortgage
D: recognizing wellsettled law that a conveyance made in good faith whether for an antecedent debt or a present consideration is not forbidden even though it may have the effect of hindering or delaying creditors by removing from their reach assets of the debtor
D.