In re Ricketts, 2013 BNH 018 (granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss count two of the complaint pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(1) as the court lacks jurisdiction over the debtor’s claim for damages for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing contained in the defendant’s mortgage and denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss count one pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6) as the debtor met her burden to plead sufficient facts that state a claim that is plausible on its face for relief for violation of the discharge injunction of 11 U.S.C. § 524(a)).
You are here
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 Cahill, 503 B.R. 535 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2013) (holding that the value of the debtors’ principal residence under §§ 506(a)(1) and 1123(b)(5) would be determined after a valuation hearing held on a date near the hearing on confirmation of the debtors’ chapter 11 plan and declining to use the value of the residence as of the petition date).
In re Turner, 2013 BNH 017 (finding that a proposed interest rate of 5%, representing an upward adjustment of 1.75% over the prime interest rate, was sufficient to satisfy the cramdown requirements of section 1129(b), using the formula approach articulated in Till v. SCS Credit Corp, 541 U.S. 465 (2004), because there was a substantial equity cushion and because the creditor had not met its burden to demonstrate the appropriateness of a greater upward adjustment).
Smith v. The Quizno’s Master LLC, (In re Bouley), 503 B.R. 524 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2013) (denying defendant’s motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and transferring adversary proceeding to the District of Colorado as required by the forum selection clause governing disputes between the debtors' bankruptcy estate and former franchisor).
In re PM Cross, 2013 BNH 014 (denying as untimely motion under Bankruptcy Rule 2018(a) of pre-bankruptcy foreclosure sale bidder to intervene in chapter 11 case and assert a request that the Court alter or amend its earlier decision not to retroactively lift the automatic stay of § 362(a)).
In re Perry, 2013 BNH 013 (overruling debtor’s objection to claim and holding that debtor had failed to provide substantial evidence under Massachusetts law that he did not owe arrearages asserted in a domestic support obligation claim filed by the Massachusetts Department of Revenue).
In re James, 2013 BNH 011 (dismissing chapter 13 case as filed in bad faith pursuant to section 1307(c) because there was no substantive change in the debtor's circumstances and because the debtor had, by his continued manipulation of the bankruptcy system, significantly delayed creditor's recovery).
In re Shea, 2013 BNH 009 (sanctioning the plaintiff’s failure to appear at a pretrial conference, under Bankruptcy Rule 7016(f), and also the plaintiff’s failure to withdraw her complaint after learning that the legal claims were not supported by evidence, under Bankruptcy Rule 9011).
In re Isaacson Steel, Inc. & Isaacson Structural Steel, 2013 BNH 010 (resolving disputes between secured creditors over the allocation of proceeds from the sale of the debtor's assets and cash reserves after cessation of operations resulting in a distribution of proceeds from the sale of inventory traceable to a secured creditor's collateral to such creditor; distribution to a secured creditor of the actual amount paid for postpetition real estate taxes as an administrative expense under section 503(b)(1)(A) &(B); and allocation of the remaining tax escrow proceeds between secured creditors for jointly administered debtors based on each debtor's relative use and benefit from use of the real property).
In re Stevens, 2013 BNH 008 (denying a creditor's motion to dismiss a chapter 13 debtor's petition as being filed in bad faith, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1307(c), because the moving creditor did not establish a sufficient evidentiary record to satisfy his burden of proof that the Debtor either (1) purposefully understated the value of certain assets on his schedules, or (2) failed to make an honest or diligent effort to list all of his debts on his schedules).