You are here

Opinions

The District of New Hampshire offers a database of opinions issued from 1999 to present. For a more detailed search, enter a keyword or case number in the search box above.

In re Drouin, 1999 BNH 041 (fining a bankruptcy petition preparer, doing business through an Internet bankruptcy site, a total of $1,000.00 for violating 11 U.S.C. §§ 110(b) and (c) due to his failure to provide his correct name and social security number, and certifying such violations to the U.S. District Court for the District of N.H. pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 110(i)(1)). 

In re Belyea, 253 B.R. 312 (Bankr. D.N.H. 1999) (holding, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 105(a), 363(h), and 1303, that the Bankruptcy Court can order the partition of real property between the debtor and a non-debtor and, under the particular facts of this case, the debtor could partition real estate that he owned jointly with his sister through confirmation of his Chapter 13 plan, which contained a provision for partition, rather than through an adversary proceeding).

Erricola v. Gaudette (In re Gaudette), 241 B.R. 491 (Bankr. D.N.H. 1999) (granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss Counts I and V, finding that the Trustee could not maintain an action which could not be maintained by the Debtor, therefore, when the Debtor had no standing to bring action for conspiracy against the Defendants under the New Hampshire doctrine of in pari delicto, the Trustee, too, was precluded from bringing the action; under the doctrine of in pari delicto the Debtor, as an alleged co-conspirator, could not maintain a cause of action for civil conspiracy naming himself or a co-conspirator a defendant).

In re Nisbet, 1999 BNH 038 (denying creditor’s prayer for dismissal of Chapter 13 plan, finding that amendment of petition to delete creditors after case was converted from Chapter 7 to Chapter 13 was not bad faith and that evidence Debtors were using Chapter 13 to avoid payment of a debt that might otherwise be excepted from discharge under Chapter 7 was not, by itself, sufficient evidence of bad faith to warrant dismissal of the plan; however, denying Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan for failure to propose a plan using all post-petition disposable income to fund plan).

Schreiber v. Emerson (In re Emerson), 244 B.R. 1 (Bankr. D.N.H. 1999) (holding that (1) the trustee did not meet his burden of proof under 11 U.S.C. §§ 727(a)(2), (a)(3), or (a)(5); (2) the trustee met his burden of proof under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(4)(A) warranting the denial of the debtors’ discharge; (3) the trustee met his burden of proof with respect to two of his claims under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b) warranting the avoidance of the debtors’ preferential transfers to insiders; (4) the trustee met his burden of proof with respect to one of his claims under 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B) warranting the avoidance of the debtors’ fraudulent transfers; and (5) the trustee met his burden of proof on all of his claims under 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and RSA 545-A:5(II) warranting the avoidance of the debtors’ fraudulent transfers to insiders), denying reconsideration, 244 B.R. 41 (Bankr. D.N.H. 1999).

In re McKibben, 1999 BNH 036 (approving fees and expenses of Chapter 13 debtor’s attorney in accordance with 11 U.S.C. § 330(a) and LBR 2016-2(c)).

HP Family Fed. Credit Union v. Oakley (In re Oakley), 1999 BNH 035 (denying plaintiff’s complaint seeking to except three debts from discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(B)).

Smith v. Anderson (In re Anderson), 1999 BNH 034 (finding three divorce-related debts owed to the ex-spouse plaintiff from the debtor to be in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support and therefore nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) and finding that the plaintiff had not met her burden of persuasion under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(15)(A) with respect to two other divorce-related debts and therefore concluding that the two debts are dischargeable).

Fischbein v. Armstrong (In re Armstrong), 1999 BNH 033 (denying plaintiff’s complaint seeking to except from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) an alleged obligation of the debtor to the plaintiff relating to a plumbing and heating subcontract).

Fischbein v. Armstrong (In re Armstrong), 1999 BNH 032 (denying plaintiff’s complaint seeking to deny the debtor’s discharge under 11 U.S.C. §§ 727(a)(2) and (a)(4)(A) for the debtor’s failure to disclose certain assets on his bankruptcy petition).

Pages