2004 Opinions


United States Bankruptcy Court District of New Hampshire



		12-22-04 In re Robotic Visions Systems, Inc., 2004 BNH 029 (limiting the chapter 11 debtors request for a second extension of time to file schedules because the debtors failed to establish “cause” pursuant to FRBP 1007(c)).

		12-16-04 In re Arsenault, 318 B.R. 616 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2004) (overruling the Chapter 7 trustee’s objection to the debtor’s claim of exemption under RSA 281-A:52 in a worker’s compensation settlement award that had been placed prepetition into a Totten trust account within the meaning of RSA 384-D:1(I) for the benefit of the debtor’s son because the award was property of the bankruptcy estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541 and therefore had not been transferred within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(54)).

		12-13-04 Cohen Steel Supply, Inc. v. Fagnant (In re Fagnant), 2004 BNH 027 (determining reasonable expenses, including attorneys' fees, under the lodestar method, as a sanction against the Defendant's counsel under FRCP 37(c) due to a failure comply with FRCP 26(e)(1)).

		12-7-04 Dahar v. Jackson (In re Jackson), 318 B.R. 5 (Bankr. D.N.H> (holding property transfers constructively fraudulent under NH RSA 545-A:(4)(I)(b)(1) and 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and entering a money judgment against the defendant transferee after an equitable adjustment under NH RSA 545-A:8(III) and denying the trustee’s complaint alleging actual fraud in estate planning transfers under NH RSA 545-A:4(I)(a) and (b)(2), as well as denying a fraudulent transfer claim under 11 U.S.C. § 548).

		12-3-04 Smith v. Daigle-Guluzian (In re Guluzian), 2004 BNH 025 (granting chapter 7 trustee’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that future Massachusetts lottery prize payments are property of the estate, defendant does not have a valid secured claim against such lottery payments and status of prepetition receipt of one such payment was a preferential transfer, but denying summary judgment on defendant’s affirmative defense to the preference claim under 11 U.S.C. § 547(c)(2)).

		11-29-04 Clarkeies Market, L.L.C. v. Estate of Kelley (In re Clarkeies Market, L.L.C.), 2004 BNH 024 (granting in part and denying in part defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the grounds that (1) two defendants did not execute any covenant not to compete and therefore could not be found liable as a matter of law for any breach of such covenant, and (2) the terms of the covenant not to compete executed by a third defendant did not require the debtor to prove actual competition between two retail grocery stores and a trial was necessary to determine whether there was an actual breach of the covenant not to compete and the available remedies for such a breach).

		08-27-04 In re MacKenzie, 314 B.R. 277 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2004) (overruling a mortgagee’s objection to the debtor’s Chapter 13 plan, which objection was based on the plan’s failure to pay the amount of a prepetition arrearage that the mortgagee alleged was owed, because the mortgagee did not have a right to receive a distribution under a confirmed plan as it did not hold an allowed claim under 11 U.S.C. § 502(a) as its claim previously had been disallowed as having been filed late, but stating that the mortgagee would retain its lien and such lien would secure any prepetition arrearage that remained outstanding postconfirmation, which arrearage amount the Court did not determine).

		08-03-04 Putney v. Putney (In re Putney), 2004 BNH 019 (holding that the plaintiff failed to meet her burden under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) that the obligation was in the nature of alimony and finding the obligation dischargeable).

		07-26-04 Longchamps Elec., Inc. v. Rothenberg (In re Wrenn Assocs., Inc.), 2004 BNH 018 (concluding that two state lawsuits, asserting claims against the debtor, a project owner, and a property owner seeking damages for breach of contract and unjust enrichment and asserting a mechanic’s lien, were properly removed to the bankruptcy court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1452(a) as the Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) and concluding that there are insufficient equitable grounds to remand under 28 U.S.C. § 1452(b)).

		05-28-04 In re Dicey, 312 B.R. 456 (Bankr. D.N.H.) (finding that the de minimis dividend, the fact that the debt would be nondischargeable under a Chapter 7, the fact that the case is in substance a one creditor case, the fact that no prepetition creditors are receiving any substantial payment, the fact that the only distributions will be to administrative creditors and the timing of the bankruptcy filing all lead to the conclusion that the debtors’ chapter 13 plan was not filed in good faith.)

		05-05-04 In re River Valley Fitness One, L.P., 2004 BNH 012 (sustaining the debtor’s objection to the portion of the creditor’s proof of claim seeking a late charge based upon the balance due after default and acceleration of the maturity of a promissory note.)

		04-26-04 Ford v. Jackson (In re Jackson), 2004 BNH 011 (denying the debtor a discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(4)(A) for making false oaths at the 341 meeting and in his statements and schedules by omitting any reference to his corporation and the nature and extent of its business but denying the trustee’s complaint with regard to his claims seeking to deny the debtor a discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(2)(B) and (a)(3)).

		04-21-04 In re Tyler, 2004 BNH 009 (sustaining chapter 7 trustee’s objection to debtor’s claim of exemption of a variable appreciable life insurance policy under RSA 511:2(XIX) as a retirement plan).

		04-08-04 Clarkeies Market, L.L.C. v. Associated Grocers of New England, Inc. (In re Clarkeies Market, L.L.C.), 2004 BNH 008 (sustaining in part and denying in part the debtor’s objection to the creditor’s proof of claim on the grounds that the creditor disposed of collateral at one location in a commercially reasonable manner and was entitled to a deficiency pursuant to RSA 382-A:9-504, but was not entitled to a deficiency claim for a second location when it had not disposed of any collateral and continued to operate the location more than three years after obtaining relief from the automatic stay either because (1) it retained the collateral in full satisfaction of the debtor’s obligations to it under the doctrine of implied strict foreclosure under RSA 382-A:9-505, or (2) failed to dispose of the collateral in a commercially reasonable manner as required by RSA 382-A:9-504).

			02-23-04 Clarkeies Market, L.L.C. v. Estate of Kelley (In re Clarkeies Market, L.L.C.), 2004 BNH 006 (denying defendants’ motion to dismiss the debtor’s adversary proceeding on statute of limitations grounds because the debtor’s objections to the defendants’ claims in the main case were sufficient to provide the defendants with notice of the debtor’s claims and to overcome any procedural infirmities, given FRBP 3007 which provides that if an objection to claim is joined with a demand for relief of a kind specified in FRBP 7001, it becomes an adversary proceeding).

				02-20-04 Amsol, Inc. v. Jaworski (In re Jaworski), 2004 BNH 005 (excepting from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) the creditor’s claim arising out of a transfer of money for the drilling of oil wells, which claim was based on a settlement that also provided for payment of attorney’s fees, and denying the creditor’s claims of non-dischargeability under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4) and 523(a)(6)).

	02-11-04 Dubois v. Snow (In re Dubois), 2004 BNH 004 (holding that an attorney’s lien under NH RSA 311:13 is a statutory lien that may not be avoided under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f))

	01-05-04 In re Marsico, 2004 BNH 001 (adopting the standard of bad faith as elucidated in In re Keach, 243 B.R. 851 (B.A.P. 1st Cir.) and In re Cabal, 285 B.R. 563 (B.A.P. 1st Cir.) in dismissing the debtor’s case as a bad faith filing under 11 U.S.C. § 707(a)

US Bankruptcy Court 1000 Elm Street, Suite 1001 Manchester, NH 03101 (603) 222-2600 Please email Web Admin with any questions regarding this web site.