Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
In this action, the plaintiff is seeking to set aside as fraudulent the conveyance of the defendant Anthony Toscanini's interest in certain real property to his former spouse, the defendant Phyllis Toscanini, which was made pursuant to a separation agreement and subsequent divorce. The plaintiff sought summary judgment on its second cause of action, which was brought under Debtor and Creditor Law § 273.
The plaintiff's contention that the Supreme Court erred in denying its motion for summary judgment on its second cause of action is without merit. In order to establish that the conveyance was fraudulent under these circumstances, the plaintiff must prove that the transfer was made without fair consideration at a time when the defendant Anthony Toscanini was insolvent (see, Debtor and Creditor Law §§ 271, 272, 273). In addition, the plaintiff would be entitled to have the conveyance set aside only if the defendant Phyllis Toscanini were not a purchaser in good faith (see, Debtor and Creditor Law § 278). However, the question of whether a person has acted in good faith and the question of what constitutes fair consideration are questions of fact to be determined under the circumstances of the particular case (see, Furlong v Storch, 132 A.D.2d 866, 868; Farmers Prod. Credit Assn. v Taub, 121 A.D.2d 681). We find that the circumstances of this case do not warrant a departure from the general rule (see, Safie v Safie, 24 A.D.2d 502, affd 17 N.Y.2d 601; Vinlis Constr. Co. v Roreck, 67 Misc.2d 942, affd 43 A.D.2d 911, lv dismissed in part and denied in part 35 N.Y.2d 715; cf., Century Center v Davis, 100 A.D.2d 564). Mangano, J.P., Bracken, Kunzeman and Balletta, JJ., concur.