P took title of a home subject to a first deed of trust in favor of Imperial Savings Association (D) to secure payment of a loan of $ 356,250 made to the Pedersens in connection with petitioner's acquisition of the home. P granted a second deed of trust to the Foremans as security for a $200,000 promissory note. Imperial entered a notice of default under the first deed of trust and scheduled a properly noticed foreclosure sale. D's foreclosure proceeding was completed at a foreclosure sale on July 12, 1989. The home was purchased by Osborne for $433,000. P filed Chapter 11 and filed a complaint seeking to set aside the conveyance of the home to Osborne on the grounds that the foreclosure sale constituted a fraudulent transfer under § 548. P alleged that the home was worth over $ 725,000 at the time of the sale to Osborne. The Bankruptcy Court dismissed the complaint as to the Osborne and granted summary judgment in favor of D. The court held that the foreclosure sale had been conducted in compliance with California law and was neither collusive nor fraudulent. The District Court affirmed. A divided bankruptcy appellate panel affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's entry of summary judgment for D. It held that a 'non-collusive and regularly conducted nonjudicial foreclosure sale . . . cannot be challenged as a fraudulent conveyance because the consideration received in such a sale establishes 'reasonably equivalent value' as a matter of law.' The Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.